Exhibit 99.3







GREAT PANTHER
SILVER LIMITED



MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

FOR THE YEAR
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2016











TABLE OF CONTENTS



|PROFILE AND STRATEGY                                       | 3 
|---------------------------------------------------------- | --
|OVERALL PERFORMANCE - OPERATIONAL AND FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | 8 
|SIGNIFICANT EVENTS                                         | 10
|MINING OPERATIONS                                          | 12
|SELECTED ANNUAL INFORMATION                                | 22
|SUMMARY OF SELECTED QUARTERLY INFORMATION                  | 23
|RESULTS OF OPERATIONS                                      | 25
|OUTLOOK                                                    | 31
|LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES                            | 31
|TRANSACTIONS WITH RELATED PARTIES                          | 34
|CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES                              | 34
|CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING POLICIES                             | 35
|FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS                                      | 36
|SECURITIES OUTSTANDING                                     | 37
|CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES                                    | 37
|NON-IFRS MEASURES                                          | 38
|CAUTIONARY STATEMENT ON FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS         | 44
|CAUTIONARY NOTE TO US INVESTORS                            | 46



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 2







This Management’s Discussion and
Analysis (“MD&A”) should be read in conjunction with the annual audited consolidated financial statements of Great
Panther Silver Limited (“Great Panther” or the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2016 and the
notes related thereto, which are prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”)
as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board, and the most recent annual Form 40–F/Annual Information Form
(“AIF”) on file with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and Canadian provincial securities
regulatory authorities.



All information in this MD&A is current
as at February 24, 2017, unless otherwise indicated.



Effective July 1, 2016, the presentation
currency of the Company was changed from the Canadian dollar (“CAD”) to the US dollar (“USD”). As a result,
all dollar amounts in this MD&A are expressed in USD, unless otherwise noted. This was done because the functional currency
of the Company, and of a number of its subsidiaries, changed to the USD. Please refer to the Changes in Accounting Policiessection of this MD&A.



This MD&A contains forward-looking
statements and should be read in conjunction with the Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Statements section at the
end of this MD&A.



Any references to “cash cost”
in this MD&A should be understood to mean cash cost per payable silver ounce, net of by-product revenue (“cash cost”).
This MD&A also makes reference to cash cost per silver equivalent ounce (“cash cost per Ag eq oz”), EBITDA, adjusted
EBITDA, mine operating earnings before non-cash items, all-in sustaining cost per payable silver ounce (“AISC”) and
all-in sustaining cost per silver equivalent ounce (“AISC per Ag eq oz”). These are all considered non-IFRS measures.
Please refer to the Non-IFRS Measures section of this MD&A for an explanation of these measures and reconciliations
to the Company’s reported financial results.



Some tables contained in this MD&A
may not sum exactly, due to rounding.



PROFILE AND STRATEGY



Great Panther Silver Limited is a primary
silver mining and precious metals producer and exploration company listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (the “TSX”)
trading under the symbol GPR, and on the NYSE MKT LLC (the “NYSE MKT”) trading under the symbol GPL. The Company’s
wholly-owned mining operations in Mexico are the Topia Mine (or “Topia”), and the Guanajuato Mine Complex (the “GMC”)
which comprises the Company’s Guanajuato Mine, the San Ignacio Mine (or “San Ignacio”), and the Cata processing
plant. The GMC produces silver and gold concentrate and is located in central Mexico, approximately 380 kilometres north-west
of Mexico City, and approximately 30 kilometres from the Guanajuato International Airport. The Topia Mine is located in the Sierra
Madre Mountains in the state of Durango in northwestern Mexico and produces concentrates containing silver, gold, lead and zinc
at its own processing facility.



On December 19, 2016, the Company entered into an agreement to acquire a 100% interest in the Coricancha
Mine Complex (the “CMC”) in Peru. The CMC is a gold-silver-copper-lead-zinc mine located in the central Andes of Peru,
approximately 90 kilometres east of Lima, and has been on care and maintenance since August 2013. The CMC has a permitted and operational
600 tonne per day processing facility along with supporting mining infrastructure. The Company expects the acquisition to close
during the first quarter of 2017.



The Company’s exploration properties
include the El Horcón, Santa Rosa and Plomo projects in Mexico; and the Argosy project in Canada. The El Horcón
project is located 100 kilometres by road northwest of Guanajuato, Santa Rosa is located approximately 15 kilometres northeast
of Guanajuato, and the Plomo property is located in Sonora, Mexico. The Argosy property is located in the Red Lake Mining District
in Northwestern Ontario, Canada. The Company did not undertake any active exploration programs on these exploration properties
in 2016.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 3







In addition, the Company continues to
evaluate additional mining opportunities in the Americas.



Additional information on the Company,
including its AIF, can be found on SEDAR at www.sedar.comand EDGAR at www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml
or on the Company’s website at www.greatpanther.com.



Goals and Objectives



Great Panther’s mission is to operate safe precious metal mines, with above average profitability,
in an environmentally and socially responsible manner for the benefit of employees, investors and communities, while pursuing its
goal to become a senior producer by acquiring and developing additional mines and advanced stage precious metals projects in the
Americas with strong operating fundamentals and cash-flow potential.



The Company’s primary goal is growth
that will increase the Company’s operating cash flow potential in a manner that will maximize long-term shareholder value.
Management’s specific objectives are to increase production and earnings from existing mining operations and realize positive
cash flow while continuing to actively develop existing projects and pursue the acquisition of new mining operations, exploration,
and development opportunities in the Americas.



Great Panther believes that its ability
to make a longstanding and positive contribution toward sustainable development through the protection of the health and well-being
of its people and its host communities, environmental stewardship, and community engagement and development is a key driver to
achieving a responsible and profitable business.



Key Performance Drivers



Great Panther’s ability to continue
to successfully achieve its goals of increasing production while generating positive cash flow is dependent on a number of factors
that are regularly measured and monitored. The Company’s key performance drivers are the following:



Metal Production



The Company commenced production at its
Guanajuato and Topia mines in 2006 and commissioned the San Ignacio Mine in 2014. In 2015, the Company grew production to a record
4.2 million silver equivalent ounces (“Ag eq oz”). Production in 2016 was 3.9 million Ag eq oz and decreased from
2015 due to three temporary shutdowns at the Topia Mine, including a temporary suspension of processing in early December 2016
to facilitate the transition to the Topia Phase II tailings storage facility and upgrades to the existing processing facilities.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 4











Since 2011, production has increased at
a compound annual growth rate of 12%. The significant growth over the past 5 years has brought production levels close to plant
capacity at the GMC. For 2017, the Company expects production to be in the range of 4.0 – 4.1 million Ag eq oz, slightly
higher than the level seen in 2016.



Fundamental to maintaining and growing
production is the ability to add mineral resources through exploration of the Company’s existing operating mines, acquisition
of mines such as the CMC, and also through the exploration and acquisition of other projects. Great Panther is committed to seeking
out other new opportunities to grow and develop its business.



Resources



As noted above, delineation of mineral
resources is essential to the future production capability of the Company. When Great Panther acquired its two existing mines
in Mexico in 2005, there were no National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) compliant resources for either property.
Since that time, the Company has allocated significant capital to support production growth through the definition of new mineral
resources at the GMC and Topia.



In 2016, the Company conducted 15,685
metres of exploration drilling at its operating mines, and plans to undertake approximately 39,500 metres of exploration drilling
on all mines and projects in 2017 to further define resources, look for vein extensions and test new targets.



Operating Costs



Attaining and maintaining low unit operating
costs is critical to achieving strong operating cash flow. As experienced in the past few years, metal prices can be volatile.
Having low unit costs increases mine net earnings and enables the Company to be more resilient during periods of weak metal prices.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 5











The Company measures and reports unit
costs in terms of cash cost and cash cost per Ag eq oz, both of which are common non-IFRS metrics reported by companies in the
mining industry. In 2016, the Company’s average cash cost decreased 51% to $3.65, while the average cash cost per Ag eq
oz decreased 9% to $10.35 (when compared to the prior year).



The Company’s reported cash cost
is affected by changes in metal prices of non-silver by-products, specifically gold at GMC and lead, zinc and gold at Topia. Cash
cost per Ag eq oz is only affected by changes in by-product metal prices to the extent that there is a change in the ratio of
these by-product prices relative to the price of silver.



The Company also measures and reports
AISC and AISC per Ag eq oz. In 2016, the Company’s average AISC decreased 20% to $10.99, whereas the average AISC per Ag
eq oz decreased 5% to $14.29.



The cash cost and AISC results for 2016
were both below the Company’s cost guidance.



Refer to the Mining Operations
and Non-IFRS Measures sectionsin this MD&A for a more detailed discussion of the Company’s cost metrics, including
details of their computation.



Metal Prices



One of the Company’s objectives
is to maintain leverage to the price of silver and gold. To this end, the Company does not engage in any long-term hedging arrangements
for either silver or gold prices. As a result, Great Panther’s share price tends to correlate very strongly with the price
of silver and gold.



During 2016, the spot price of silver
increased by 18% from $13.821 per
ounce at the beginning of the year to $16.24 per ounce at the end of the year. The spot price of gold increased by 9% from $1,0622per ounce at the beginning of the year to $1,159 per ounce at the end of the year. The prices of silver and gold have fluctuated
significantly in recent years and are expected to continue to be volatile in 2017.












1 London Bullion Market Association
Silver Fixings

2 London Bullion Market Association
AM Gold Fixings



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 6







The Company’s financial results
are very sensitive to the price of silver and gold, and to a lesser extent, lead and zinc. The following table summarizes the
effect of changes in the silver price on the Company’s 2017 revenue outlook, based on an assumed production of 4.1 million
silver equivalent ounces, which represents the top of the Company’s production guidance range for 2017:



Revenue Sensitivity to Change in Silver
Price



|Silver price per ounce |  |  |       |  | $13.50 |   |        | $15.50 |  |   | $17.50 |  |  | $19.50 |        |  | $21.50 |  
|---------------------- |  |  | ----- |  | ------ | - | ------ | ------ |  | - | ------ |  |  | ------ | ------ |  | ------ | -
|GMC revenue            |  |  | 000’s |  |        | $ | 41,316 |        |  | $ | 43,897 |  |  | $      | 46,477 |  |        | $
|Topia revenue          |  |  | 000’s |  |        |   | 13,956 |        |  |   | 15,295 |  |  |        | 16,634 |  |        |  
|Total revenue          |  |  | 000’s |  |        |   | 55,272 |        |  |   | 59,192 |  |  |        | 63,111 |  |        |  



Assumes gold price of $1,190/oz, zinc
price of $1.15/lb., lead price of $0.95/lb., and production of 4.1 million Ag eq oz.



Revenue Sensitivity to Change in Gold
Price



|Gold price per ounce |  |  |       |  | $1,000 |   |        | $1,100 |  |   | $1,200 |  |  | $1,300 |        |  | $1,400 |  
|-------------------- |  |  | ----- |  | ------ | - | ------ | ------ |  | - | ------ |  |  | ------ | ------ |  | ------ | -
|GMC revenue          |  |  | 000’s |  |        | $ | 41,633 |        |  | $ | 43,843 |  |  | $      | 46,053 |  |        | $
|Topia revenue        |  |  | 000’s |  |        |   | 16,223 |        |  |   | 16,264 |  |  |        | 16,304 |  |        |  
|Total revenue        |  |  | 000’s |  |        |   | 57,856 |        |  |   | 60,107 |  |  |        | 62,357 |  |        |  



Assumes silver price of $17.00/oz, zinc
price of $1.15/lb., lead price of $0.95/lb., and production of 4.1 million Ag eq oz.



The Company’s cash cost is affected
by changes in metal prices of the by-products of silver, specifically gold at GMC and lead, zinc and gold at Topia. The following
tables summarize the effect of changes in prices of gold, lead and zinc on the Company’s 2017 estimated cash cost based
on an assumed production of 4.1 million Ag eq oz and assumed cash cost of $5.00, which represent the top of the Company’s
production guidance range and bottom of the cash cost guidance range for 2017, respectively.



Cash Cost: Sensitivity to Change in
Gold Price



|Gold price per ounce |  | $1,000 |      |  | $1,100 |   |      | $1,200 |  |   | $1,300 |  |  | $1,400 |     
|-------------------- |  | ------ | ---- |  | ------ | - | ---- | ------ |  | - | ------ |  |  | ------ | ----
|Cash cost            |  | $      | 7.18 |  |        | $ | 6.04 |        |  | $ | 4.89   |  |  | $      | 3.74



Assumes silver price of $17.00/oz, zinc
price of $1.15/lb., lead price of $0.95/lb., and production of 4.1 million Ag eq oz.



Cash Cost: Sensitivity to Change in
Zinc Price



|Zinc price per pound |  | $1.05 |      |  | $1.15 |   |      | $1.25 |  |   | $1.35 |  |  | $1.45 |     
|-------------------- |  | ----- | ---- |  | ----- | - | ---- | ----- |  | - | ----- |  |  | ----- | ----
|Cash cost            |  | $     | 5.12 |  |       | $ | 5.00 |       |  | $ | 4.91  |  |  | $     | 4.83



Assumes gold price of $1,190/oz, silver
price of $17.00/oz., lead price of $0.95/lb., and production of 4.1 million Ag eq oz.



Cash Cost: Sensitivity to Change in
Lead Price



|Lead price per pound |  | $0.85 |      |  | $0.95 |   |      | $1.05 |  |   | $1.15 |  |  | $1.25 |     
|-------------------- |  | ----- | ---- |  | ----- | - | ---- | ----- |  | - | ----- |  |  | ----- | ----
|Cash cost            |  | $     | 5.11 |  |       | $ | 5.00 |       |  | $ | 4.92  |  |  | $     | 4.85



Assumes gold price of $1,190/oz, zinc
price of $1.15/lb., silver price of $17.00/oz., and production of 4.1 million Ag eq oz.










1 London Bullion Market Association AM Gold Fixings



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 7







OVERALL PERFORMANCE - OPERATIONAL
AND FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS





|                                         |  | Q4 2016 |         |  | Q4 2015 |   |           | Change |  |  | 2016 |    |  | 2015 |           |  | Change |  
|---------------------------------------- |  | ------- | ------- |  | ------- | - | --------- | ------ |  |  | ---- | -- |  | ---- | --------- |  | ------ | -
|OPERATING RESULTS                        |  |         |         |  |         |   |           |        |  |  |      |    |  |      |           |  |        |  
|Tonnes milled (excluding custom milling) |  |         | 92,869  |  |         |   | 94,874    |        |  |  | (2   | )% |  |      | 376,739   |  |        |  
|Ag eq oz produced1                       |  |         | 883,772 |  |         |   | 1,002,584 |        |  |  | (12  | )% |  |      | 3,884,960 |  |        |  
|Silver ounce production                  |  |         | 460,571 |  |         |   | 553,189   |        |  |  | (17  | )% |  |      | 2,047,260 |  |        |  
|Gold ounce production                    |  |         | 5,206   |  |         |   | 5,637     |        |  |  | (8   | )% |  |      | 22,238    |  |        |  
|Payable silver ounces                    |  |         | 488,428 |  |         |   | 502,170   |        |  |  | (3   | )% |  |      | 2,010,252 |  |        |  
|Ag eq oz sold                            |  |         | 883,348 |  |         |   | 921,710   |        |  |  | (4   | )% |  |      | 3,742,733 |  |        |  
|Cost per tonne milled2                   |  | $       | 86      |  |         | $ | 97        |        |  |  | (11  | )% |  | $    | 88        |  |        | $
|Cash cost2                               |  | $       | 5.83    |  |         | $ | 8.14      |        |  |  | (28  | )% |  | $    | 3.65      |  |        | $
|Cash cost per Ag eq oz2                  |  | $       | 10.48   |  |         | $ | 11.31     |        |  |  | (7   | )% |  | $    | 10.35     |  |        | $
|AISC2                                    |  | $       | 16.44   |  |         | $ | 15.10     |        |  |  | 9    | %  |  | $    | 10.99     |  |        | $
|AISC per Ag eq oz2                       |  | $       | 16.35   |  |         | $ | 15.07     |        |  |  | 8    | %  |  | $    | 14.29     |  |        | $



|(in 000’s, unless otherwise noted)                                  |  | Q4 2016 |        |   | Q4 2015 |   |        | Change |  |  | 2016 |    |  | 2015 |        |   | Change |  
|------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------- | ------ | - | ------- | - | ------ | ------ |  |  | ---- | -- |  | ---- | ------ | - | ------ | -
|FINANCIAL RESULTS                                                   |  |         |        |   |         |   |        |        |  |  |      |    |  |      |        |   |        |  
|Revenue                                                             |  | $       | 12,515 |   |         | $ | 13,142 |        |  |  | (5   | )% |  | $    | 61,881 |   |        | $
|Mine operating earnings before non-cash items2                      |  | $       | 4,476  |   |         | $ | 3,760  |        |  |  | 19   | %  |  | $    | 27,728 |   |        | $
|Mine operating earnings                                             |  | $       | 2,411  |   |         | $ | 2,471  |        |  |  | (2   | )% |  | $    | 22,022 |   |        | $
|Net loss                                                            |  | $       | (1,498 | ) |         | $ | (3,725 | )      |  |  | (60  | )% |  | $    | (4,118 | ) |        | $
|Adjusted EBITDA2                                                    |  | $       | 1,376  |   |         | $ | (427   | )      |  |  | (422 | )% |  | $    | 16,519 |   |        | $
|Operating cash flows before changes in non-cash net working capital |  | $       | 1,119  |   |         | $ | (593   | )      |  |  | (289 | )% |  | $    | 15,975 |   |        | $
|Cash and short-term deposits at end of period                       |  | $       | 56,662 |   |         | $ | 13,685 |        |  |  | 314  | %  |  | $    | 56,662 |   |        | $
|Net working capital at end of period                                |  | $       | 66,560 |   |         | $ | 25,477 |        |  |  | 161  | %  |  | $    | 66,560 |   |        | $
|Average realized silver price per oz 3                              |  | $       | 14.99  |   |         | $ | 13.57  |        |  |  | 10   | %  |  | $    | 17.15  |   |        | $
|Loss per share – basic and diluted                                  |  | $       | (0.01  | ) |         | $ | (0.03  | )      |  |  | (67  | )% |  | $    | (0.03  | ) |        | $







Highlights of 2016 compared to 2015,
unless otherwise noted:



| | · | Metal
                                         production decreased 7% to 3,884,960 Ag eq oz;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Silver
                                         production decreased 14% to 2,047,260 ounces;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Gold
                                         production increased 2% to 22,238 ounces, an annual record;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Cash
                                         cost decreased 51% to $3.65 per payable silver ounce, below 2016 guidance;
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------








| | 1 | Silver
                                         equivalent ounces are referred to throughout this document. For 2016, Ag eq oz are calculated
                                         using a 70:1 Ag:Au ratio and ratios of 1:0.0504 and 1:0.0504 for the price/ounce of silver
                                         to lead and zinc price/pound, respectively, and applied to the relevant metal content
                                         of the concentrates produced, expected to be produced, or sold from operations. Comparatively,
                                         in 2015 Ag eq oz were calculated using a 65:1 Ag:Au ratio, and ratios of 1:0.050 and
                                         1:0.056 for the price/ounce of silver to lead and zinc price/pound, respectively, and
                                         applied to the relevant metal content of the concentrates produced, expected to be produced,
                                         or sold from operations.
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | The Company
                                         has included the non-IFRS performance measures cost per tonne milled, cash cost, cash
                                         cost per Ag eq oz, AISC, AISC per Ag eq oz, mine operating earnings before non-cash items
                                         and adjusted EBITDA throughout this document. Refer to the Non-IFRS Measures section
                                         of this MD&A for an explanation of these measures and reconciliation to the Company’s
                                         reported financial results in accordance with IFRS. As these are not standardized measures,
                                         they may not be directly comparable to similarly titled measures used by others.
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 3 | Average
                                         realized silver price is prior to smelting and refining charges.
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 8







| | · | Cash
                                         cost per Ag eq oz decreased 9% to $10.35;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | AISC
                                         decreased 20% to $10.99 per payable silver ounce, below 2016 guidance;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | AISC
                                         per Ag eq oz decreased 5% to $14.29;
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Revenue
                                         increased 10% to $61.9 million;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Mine
                                         operating earnings before non-cash items increased to $27.7 million, a 51% increase compared
                                         to $18.4 million;
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Adjusted
                                         EBITDA improved to $16.5 million from $7.1 million;
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Net
                                         loss totaled $4.1 million, compared to a net loss of $7.2 million;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Cash
                                         flows from operating activities, before changes in non-cash net working capital (“NCWC”),
                                         increased to $16.0 million, from $7.0 million;
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Cash
                                         and short-term deposits increased to $56.7 million at December 31, 2016 from $13.7
                                         million at December 31, 2015; and
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Net
                                         working capital increased to $66.6 million at December 31, 2016 from $25.5 million at
                                         December 31, 2015.
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Highlights of the fourth quarter 2016 compared to fourth
quarter 2015:



| | · | Metal
                                         production decreased 12% to 883,772 Ag eq oz;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Silver
                                         production decreased 17% to 460,571 ounces;
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Gold
                                         production decreased 8% to 5,206 ounces;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Cash
                                         cost decreased 28% to $5.83 per ounce;
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | AISC
                                         increased 9% to $16.44 per payable silver ounce;
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Revenue
                                         decreased 5% to $12.5 million;
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Mine
                                         operating earnings before non-cash items was $4.5 million, an increase of 19%;
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Adjusted
                                         EBITDA amounted to $1.4 million compared to negative $0.4 million;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Net
                                         loss totaled $1.5 million, compared to a net loss of $3.7 million; and
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Cash
                                         flow from operating activities before changes in non-cash net working capital amounted
                                         to $1.1 million, compared to negative $0.6 million.
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 9







SIGNIFICANT EVENTS



On January 14, 2016, the Company reported
a theft of explosives from one of the mines at the GMC. The Company voluntarily suspended the use of all explosives material at
the GMC to facilitate ongoing investigations by regulatory authorities, and to enhance security. On February 16, 2016, the regulatory
authorities concluded their formal investigation. Operations at the GMC were intermittently halted over the investigation period
and were fully resumed on February 16, 2016.



In February 2016, Comisión Nacional
del Agua (“CONAGUA”), the Mexican federal agency responsible for water administration, required that the Company make
formal applications for permits associated with the occupation and construction of the tailings storage facility at the GMC. Following
the February meeting, the Company filed its applications. After the Company filed the applications, CONAGUA carried out an inspection
of the tailings storage facility and requested further technical information. The Company is in the process of compiling the requested
technical information. The compilation, submission, and CONAGUA’s review of such information, has been ongoing for several
months, and is expected to continue to extend at least into the second quarter of 2017. Please refer to the GMC Development section of
this MD&A for additional information.



On February 24, 2016, the Company elected
to terminate an option to purchase the Guadalupe de los Reyes Project in Sinaloa, Mexico, after concluding an evaluation of the
project, which included a surface diamond drill program.



On April 21, 2016, the Company entered
into an At-the-Market Offering (the “ATM Offering”) agreement under which the Company had the discretion to sell common
shares up to a maximum in gross sales proceeds of $10.0 million, until December 31, 2016. The Company issued 3,498,627 common
shares under the ATM Offering for aggregate gross proceeds of $5.7 million.



On May 11, 2016, the Company elected to
terminate an option agreement to acquire a 100% interest in the CMC. The decision terminated the Company’s exclusive right
to explore and purchase the CMC, but the Company continued its evaluation of the project and its negotiations with the owner.
The Company recorded an impairment charge of $1.7 million as a result of the termination of its exclusive right to explore and
purchase the CMC.



On July 12, 2016, the Company closed an
equity bought deal offering that was announced on July 6, 2016. Upon closing, the Company sold 18,687,500 Units at a price of
$1.60 per Unit for gross proceeds of $29.9 million. Each Unit consisted of one common share of the Company and one-half of one
common share purchase warrant (each whole warrant, a “Warrant”). Each Warrant entitles the holder to purchase one
share at the exercise price of $2.25 per share for a period of 18 months after the closing of the offering. The Company paid a
cash commission to the underwriters equal to 6% of the gross proceeds of the offering. The Company intends to use the net proceeds
from this offering, along with the net proceeds from the aforementioned ATM Offering, to fund operating, development and exploration
expenditures at its mining operations and projects, for possible future acquisitions, and for general corporate and working capital
purposes. To the date of this MD&A, the net proceeds of the ATM Offering and the bought deal offering have not been used and
have been placed in short-term bank guaranteed deposits or other similarly secure deposits.



On October 31, 2016, the Company filed
a short form base shelf prospectus with the securities commissions in each of the provinces and territories of Canada, except
for Quebec, and a corresponding registration statement on Form F-10 with the SEC. Subject to the subsequent preparation and filing
of a prospectus supplement, these filings allow Great Panther to make offerings of common shares, warrants, subscription receipts,
units, or any combination thereof, having an aggregate offering price of up to $80.0 million (CAD) in Canada and the United States
over a 25-month period. Great Panther filed this base shelf prospectus with the intention of maintaining financial flexibility,
and the maximum amount that could potentially be offered under the base shelf prospectus does not reflect an estimate of future
financing requirements. At this time, there are no foreseeable financing requirements associated with the Company’s existing
operating and development plans, however, the execution of the Company’s growth strategy may warrant further financing.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 10







In early December 2016, the Company temporarily
halted processing at the Topia Mine in order to facilitate certain plant upgrades and a transition to a new tailings storage facility
under construction. Mine operations have continued during the plant shutdown and all ore is being stockpiled to be processed when
the plant restarts. The Company plans to restart the plant prior to the end of the first quarter of 2017. Further details regarding
the new tailings storage facility are included in the Topia Development section.



On December 19, 2016, the Company entered
into an agreement whereby the Company’s wholly-owned Peruvian subsidiary will acquire all the shares of Nyrstar Coricancha
S.A. (“Coricancha”) from subsidiaries of Nyrstar N.V. (“Nyrstar”). Coricancha is the owner of a 100% interest
in the CMC. Under the terms of the purchase agreement, the purchase price comprises (i) $0.1 million to be paid upon closing,
(ii) an amount equal to cash on hand in Coricancha at completion, and (iii) earn-out consideration of up to $10.0 million. Under
the earn-out, Nyrstar will be paid 15% of the free cash flow generated by the CMC during the 5-year period after which the CMC
is cumulative free-cash flow positive from closing.





Pursuant to the purchase agreement, the
Company will undertake the reclamation of certain legacy tailings facilities at the CMC, which Nyrstar will fund to a maximum of
$20 million. In addition, Nyrstar will maintain a $9.7 million closure bond for the CMC for a period of three years from the time
of closing. The Company will assume this mine closure bond at the end of this three-year period, unless the Company determines
within this three-year period to permanently close the CMC. In the event of a determination to permanently close the CMC within
this period, Nyrstar will fund mine closure costs to the extent of its mine closure bond obligation. Nyrstar has also agreed to
settle all outstanding fines or sanctions, to a maximum of $4 million (subject to certain exclusions to which the cap will not
apply). Any obligations that exceed the amounts guaranteed by Nyrstar are the responsibility of the Company.



The Company experienced one fatality at
its Topia Mine and two fatalities at the GMC in 2016. The Company considers health and safety of its workers, and others in the
communities in which it operates, to be a top priority. The Company completed extensive investigations into each event and routinely
undertakes safety training and updates and improvements to safety procedures and practices to minimize injuries and provide the
safest work environment possible.





GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 11







MINING OPERATIONS



Consolidated operations



|                        |  | 2016 |           |  | 2015 |  
|----------------------- |  | ---- | --------- |  | ---- | -
|                        |  | FY   |           |  | Q4   |  
|Tonnes mined1           |  |      | 378,121   |  |      |  
|Tonnes milled           |  |      | 376,739   |  |      |  
|Custom milling (tonnes) |  |      | 5,125     |  |      |  
|Total tonnes milled     |  |      | 381,864   |  |      |  
|Production              |  |      |           |  |      |  
|Silver (ounces)         |  |      | 2,047,260 |  |      |  
|Gold (ounces)           |  |      | 22,238    |  |      |  
|Lead (tonnes)           |  |      | 1,034     |  |      |  
|Zinc (tonnes)           |  |      | 1,496     |  |      |  
|Ag eq oz                |  |      | 3,884,960 |  |      |  
|Sales                   |  |      |           |  |      |  
|Payable silver ounces   |  |      | 2,010,252 |  |      |  
|Ag eq oz sold           |  |      | 3,742,733 |  |      |  
|Cost metrics            |  |      |           |  |      |  
|Cost per tonne milled   |  | $    | 88        |  |      | $
|Cash cost               |  | $    | 3.65      |  |      | $
|Cash cost per Ag eq oz  |  | $    | 10.35     |  |      | $
|AISC                    |  | $    | 10.99     |  |      | $
|AISC per Ag eq oz       |  | $    | 14.29     |  |      | $










1 Excludes purchased ore.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 12











Ore processed for the year ended December
31, 2016 remained consistent with the prior year level (details in the table above).



During the fourth quarter 2016, ore processed
decreased by 2% compared to the fourth quarter of 2015 and was attributable to the temporary suspension in processing at the Topia
Mine in early December 2016. For the same reason the throughput decreased by 3% relative to the third quarter of 2016.







Metal production for the year ended December
31, 2016 decreased 7% compared to the prior year. The decrease in production reflected the 15% lower throughput at Topia due to
three temporary shutdowns in operations, as well as lower ore grades and recoveries at the GMC.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 13







Metal production decreased 12% relative
to the fourth quarter of 2015, predominantly due to the 25% reduction in throughput at the Topia Mine, in light of the temporary
suspension of milling operations in early December 2016 to facilitate the transition to the Topia Phase II tailings storage facility
and upgrades to the existing processing facilities. In addition, the Company’s operations during the fourth quarter of 2016
were challenged by lower grades and gold recoveries. Compared to the third quarter of 2016, metal production decreased by 7%,
as the fourth quarter of 2016 was impacted by the lower throughput at Topia and lower grades at the GMC.







The Company continued its trend of significant
reductions in cash cost (on a payable silver ounce basis) from prior year levels.



Cash cost was $3.65 for the year ended
December 31, 2016, a 51% decrease compared to the year ended December 31, 2015. The decrease in cash cost was due to the impact
of higher by-product credits due to higher average realized gold, zinc and lead prices. In addition, the strengthening of the
USD compared to the Mexican peso (“MXN”) reduced cash operating costs in USD terms. These factors were partly offset
by higher MXN unit production costs and the impact of lower payable silver ounces, both of which were attributable in part to
the lower ore grades.



Similarly, cash cost for the fourth quarter
of 2016 decreased 28% compared to the fourth quarter of 2015, to $5.83. The decrease in cash cost was predominantly the result
of the strengthening of the USD compared to the MXN which had the effect of reducing cash operating costs in USD terms (production
costs are predominantly denominated in MXN). In addition, cash cost in the fourth quarter of 2016 benefitted from higher by-product
credits per payable silver ounce, resulting from an increase in average realized gold, zinc and lead prices. These factors were
partly offset by higher MXN unit production costs and the impact of lower payable silver ounces.



Cash cost for the fourth quarter of 2016
increased 77% compared to the third quarter of 2016, due to the impact of lower by-product credits as payable gold ounces declined
as a result of lower grades, and the Company also realized lower average gold prices during the fourth quarter of 2016.



Cash cost per Ag eq oz for the year ended
December 31, 2016 decreased 9% compared to 2015 and was predominantly the result of the more favourable MXN/USD exchange rates.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 14







Similarly, cash cost per Ag eq oz decreased
7% compared to the fourth quarter of 2015 due to favourable MXN/USD exchange rates.



Cash cost and the associated by-product
credits are computed based on sales during the period as opposed to a production basis. As such, the amount of the by-product
credit may not directly correlate to the production reported for the period. Similarly, the cost per tonne milled during the period
may not directly correlate to the cash cost and cash cost per Ag eq oz reported for the same period due to differences between
production and sales volumes. Furthermore, the determination of cash cost per Ag eq oz differs from the determination of cash
cost. Refer to Non-IFRS Measuresfor a detailed reconciliation of cash cost and of cash cost per Ag eq oz.



AISC for the year ended December 31, 2016
was $10.99, a 20% decrease compared to the prior year, primarily due to the reduction in cash cost described above, as well as
reductions in sustaining exploration, evaluation and development (“EE&D”) and general and administration (“G&A”)
expenditure. The impact of the lower cash cost was partly offset by the impact of an increase in sustaining capital expenditure
and lower payable silver ounces which further increased sustaining capital expenditures on a per-unit basis.



AISC for the fourth quarter of 2016 was
$16.44, a 9% increase compared to the fourth quarter of 2015, predominantly due to an increase in sustaining capital expenditures,
including the construction of the Phase II tailings storage facility and related plant upgrades at Topia. This was partly offset
by the reduction in cash cost described above.



Compared to the third quarter of 2016,
AISC increased 37%. AISC was significantly higher in the fourth quarter of 2016 compared to the prior quarters of 2016 due to
the aforementioned increase in cash cost and due to an increase in sustaining capital and development expenditures. One significant
project is the transition to the Topia Phase II tailings storage facility and related plant improvements, which is expected to
be completed prior to end of the first quarter of 2017.



AISC per Ag eq oz for the year ended December
31, 2016 was $14.29, a 5% decrease compared to the year ended December 31, 2015. This was mainly attributable to the 9% decrease
in cash cost per Ag eq oz described above.



AISC per Ag eq oz for the fourth quarter
of 2016 was $16.35, an 8% increase compared to the fourth quarter of 2015. This was mainly attributable to the increase in sustaining
capital expenditures, augmented by the impact of a 4% decrease in Ag eq oz sales volumes.



AISC per Ag eq oz for the fourth quarter
of 2016 increased 6% from the third quarter of 2016, predominantly due to the increase in sustaining capital expenditures and
G&A expenses, partly offset by the impact of the higher sales volumes.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 15









Guanajuato Mine Complex





|                       |  | 2016 |           |   | 2015 |  
|---------------------- |  | ---- | --------- | - | ---- | -
|                       |  | FY   |           |   | Q4   |  
|Tonnes milled          |  |      | 320,903   |   |      |  
|Production             |  |      |           |   |      |  
|Silver (ounces)        |  |      | 1,473,229 |   |      |  
|Gold (ounces)          |  |      | 21,627    |   |      |  
|Ag eq oz               |  |      | 2,987,073 |   |      |  
|Sales                  |  |      |           |   |      |  
|Payable silver ounces  |  |      | 1,477,695 |   |      |  
|Ag eq oz sold          |  |      | 2,954,567 |   |      |  
|Average ore grades     |  |      |           |   |      |  
|Silver (g/t)           |  |      | 163       |   |      |  
|Gold (g/t)             |  |      | 2.43      |   |      |  
|Metal recoveries       |  |      |           |   |      |  
|Silver                 |  |      | 87.9      | % |      |  
|Gold                   |  |      | 86.4      | % |      |  
|Cost metrics           |  |      |           |   |      |  
|Cost per tonne milled  |  | $    | 78        |   |      | $
|Cash cost              |  | $    | 0.85      |   |      | $
|Cash cost per Ag eq oz |  | $    | 9.48      |   |      | $
|AISC                   |  | $    | 5.20      |   |      | $
|AISC per Ag eq oz      |  | $    | 11.66     |   |      | $



Tonnes of ore processed for the fourth
quarter and the year ended December 31, 2016 increased by 2% and 4%, respectively, relative to the prior-year comparative periods.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 16











Metal production (in Ag eq oz terms) at
the GMC for the year ended December 31, 2016, decreased 3% compared to the year ended 2015. The decrease reflects the impact of
lower silver and lower recoveries of both silver and gold.



Metal production from the GMC decreased
7% compared to the fourth quarter of 2015. The decrease reflects the impact of lower silver and gold grades and gold recoveries,
mainly reflecting variances from the modelled mineral resource.



Cash cost for the GMC for the year ended
December 31, 2016 was $0.85, an 85% decrease compared to the prior year. The decrease is primarily due to the effect of higher
by-product credits associated with higher realized average gold prices. In addition, the strengthening of the USD relative to
the MXN reduced cash operating costs in USD terms as these are predominantly incurred in MXN. These factors were partly offset
by the impact of higher MXN production cost on a per-unit-basis and the effect of lower payable silver ounces.



The GMC’s cash cost during the fourth
quarter of 2016 decreased 35% to $4.27, compared to $6.54 during the fourth quarter of 2015. This was primarily a result of the
strengthening of the USD relative to the MXN which reduced production costs in USD terms, lower MXN production cost and higher
payable silver ounces. These factors were partly offset by lower by-product credits as gold ounces sold decreased by 12%.



Cash cost per Ag eq oz for the GMC for
the year ended December 31, 2016 was $9.48, a 12% decrease compared to the year ended December 31, 2015. This was primarily a
result of the strengthening of the USD relative to the MXN which reduced production costs in USD terms, partly offset by the impact
of higher MXN production cost on a per-unit-basis and the effect of lower silver equivalent ounces sold.



Similarly, cash cost per Ag eq oz for
the GMC was $9.51 for the fourth quarter of 2016; a 12% decrease compared to the fourth quarter of 2015. This was primarily a
result of the strengthening of the USD relative to the MXN which reduced production costs in USD terms, partly offset by the effect
of lower silver equivalent ounces sold.

GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 17







AISC for the year ended December 31, 2016
decreased by 48% to $5.20 compared to the year ended December 31, 2015, primarily due to the above-noted reduction in cash cost.
In addition, there was a reduction in sustaining EE&D expenditures. These factors were partly offset by an increase in sustaining
capital expenditures and the impact of lower payable silver ounces noted above.



AISC for the fourth quarter of 2016 increased
by 3% to $10.88, when compared to the fourth quarter of 2015. This was primarily due to an increase in sustaining EE&D and
capital expenditures, partly offset by the impact of the reduction in cash cost.



AISC per Ag eq oz for the year ended December
31, 2016 decreased by 10% to $11.66 compared to the prior year, primarily due to the above-noted reduction in cash cost per Ag
eq oz. In addition, there was a reduction in sustaining EE&D expenditures, partly offset by the impact of higher sustaining
capital expenditures.



AISC per Ag eq oz for the fourth quarter
of 2016 increased by 1% to $12.98, when compared to the fourth quarter of 2015. The increase was primarily due to the increase
in sustaining EE&D and capital expenditures, and was partly offset by the impact of the reduction in cash cost.



GMC Development



A total of 9,540 metres of development
were completed at the GMC during the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to 11,111 metres of development in 2015. The majority
of mine development during the year was focused on the San Ignacio Mine. A total of 2,499 metres of development was completed
during the fourth quarter of 2016, with the majority of this work associated with San Ignacio.



The Company completed 15,685 metres of
exploration drilling at the GMC during 2016, compared to 17,680 metres in 2015. Drilling at the Guanajuato Mine totaled 7,200
metres, and was focused on the Guanajuatito and Valenciana mines. This compares to 13,024 metres of drilling at the Guanajuato
Mine in 2015. At San Ignacio, total drilling amounted to 8,458 metres for the year, compared to 4,657 metres in 2015.



The Company’s fourth quarter 2016
drill program at the GMC included 6,746 metres which was focused on Guanajuatito and San Ignacio, with the objective of improving
the resource definition in these areas.



In February 2016, CONAGUA required that
the Company make formal applications for permits associated with the occupation and construction of the tailings storage facility
at the GMC. Following the February meeting, the Company filed its applications. After the Company filed the applications, CONAGUA
carried out an inspection of the tailings storage facility and requested further technical information. The Company is in the
process of compiling the requested technical information. The compilation, submission, and CONAGUA’s review of such information,
has been ongoing for several months, and is expected to continue to extend at least into the second quarter of 2017. The Company believes its
current tailings footprint can be maintained and will support operations at the GMC until at least 2020. The Company also believes,
based on its meetings and other communication with CONAGUA, that it will be able to obtain all of the above noted permits if and
as required, with no suspension of the GMC operations. While the Company is confident that it will obtain the tailings permits,
there is no guarantee that it will complete the review process with CONAGUA without any actions that may suspend its operations.
Nor is there any guarantee that the terms of such permits will be favourable to the Company. The failure to obtain a required
permit could impact the Company’s ability to continue operating at the GMC.



Since the February meeting with CONAGUA, the Company has also discovered through its own undertaking that
some additional CONAGUA permits may be needed in connection with water discharge and use at the GMC tailings storage facility and
at San Ignacio. An application has been made for the permit in the case of San Ignacio. The Company is assessing whether it requires
an additional water use permit during the dry season. The Company is also working on increasing its collection of infiltration
water in order to effectively reduce its use of water. The Company believes that it will be able to acquire any necessary water
discharge and use permits without any impact to its operations, or modify operating activities such that no additional permits
are required, but cannot guarantee that there is no risk in this regard.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 18







Topia Mine



|                        |  | 2016 |         |   | 2015 |  
|----------------------- |  | ---- | ------- | - | ---- | -
|                        |  | FY   |         |   | Q4   |  
|Tonnes milled           |  |      | 55,836  |   |      |  
|Custom milling (tonnes) |  |      | 5,125   |   |      |  
|Total tonnes milled     |  |      | 60,961  |   |      |  
|Production              |  |      |         |   |      |  
|Silver (ounces)         |  |      | 574,031 |   |      |  
|Gold (ounces)           |  |      | 612     |   |      |  
|Lead (tonnes)           |  |      | 1,034   |   |      |  
|Zinc (tonnes)           |  |      | 1,496   |   |      |  
|Ag eq oz                |  |      | 897,886 |   |      |  
|Sales                   |  |      |         |   |      |  
|Payable silver ounces   |  |      | 532,557 |   |      |  
|Ag eq oz sold           |  |      | 788,166 |   |      |  
|Average ore grade       |  |      |         |   |      |  
|Silver (g/t)            |  |      | 354     |   |      |  
|Gold (g/t)              |  |      | 0.56    |   |      |  
|Lead (%)                |  |      | 1.96    |   |      |  
|Zinc (%)                |  |      | 2.82    |   |      |  
|Metal recoveries        |  |      |         |   |      |  
|Silver                  |  |      | 90.4    | % |      |  
|Gold                    |  |      | 60.6    | % |      |  
|Lead                    |  |      | 94.4    | % |      |  
|Zinc                    |  |      | 95.1    | % |      |  
|Cost metrics            |  |      |         |   |      |  
|Cost per tonne milled   |  | $    | 143     |   |      | $
|Cash cost               |  | $    | 11.43   |   |      | $
|Cash cost per Ag eq oz  |  | $    | 13.62   |   |      | $
|AISC                    |  | $    | 15.31   |   |      | $
|AISC per Ag eq oz       |  | $    | 16.24   |   |      | $



Mill throughput for Topia (excluding tonnes
milled for third parties) for the year ended December 31, 2016 decreased 15% compared to the prior year. This was mainly due to
the two temporary plant shut-downs during the third quarter of 2016, as well as the temporary halt in processing operations in
early December 2016 to facilitate the transition to the Topia Phase II tailings storage facility (see Topia Development).



Mill throughput for Topia in the fourth
quarter of 2016 decreased 25% compared to the fourth quarter of 2015, due to the temporary halt in processing operations in early
December 2016.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 19











Metal production at Topia for the year
ended December 31, 2016 decreased 17% compared to 2015, mainly due to the reductions in throughput as described above.



Metal production in the fourth quarter
of 2016 decreased by 28% compared to the fourth quarter of 2015. This was predominantly due to the 25% reduction in throughput,
while the operations also encountered narrower veins which increased dilution and decreased silver grade. As a consequence, recoveries
of gold and silver also decreased during the quarter.



For the year ended December 31, 2015,
cash cost for Topia was $11.43, a decrease of 6% from the prior year. The decrease in cash cost was primarily driven by the strengthening
of the USD against the MXN which reduced costs in USD terms, augmented by higher by-product credits due to higher base metal prices.
This was partly offset by an increase in actual MXN-denominated production costs, as well as the impact of lower payable silver
ounces.



Cash cost for the fourth quarter of 2016
decreased by 14% to $10.19 compared to the fourth quarter of 2015. The decrease was primarily the result of the strengthening
of the USD against the MXN which reduced costs in USD terms, as well as higher by-product credits due to higher lead and zinc
prices. This was partly offset by an increase in actual MXN-denominated production costs and the impact of lower payable silver
ounces.



Cash cost per Ag eq oz for Topia for the
year ended December 31, 2016 was $13.62, a 2% increase compared to the year ended December 31, 2015, primarily driven by lower
Ag eq oz sales volumes.



Similarly, cash cost per Ag eq oz for
Topia was $13.83 for the fourth quarter of 2016; a 9% increase compared to the fourth quarter of 2015.



AISC for the year ended December 31, 2016
was $15.31, a 16% increase compared to the year ended December 31, 2015, primarily due to the increases in sustaining capital
expenditures associated with the construction of the Phase II tailings storage facility and certain plant upgrades (see Topia
Development). AISC per Ag eq oz increased 16% compared to the year ended 2015 for similar reasons.



AISC for the fourth quarter of 2016 increased
46% compared to the fourth quarter of 2015, primarily due to the increases in sustaining capital expenditures associated with
the construction of the Phase II tailings storage facility and certain plant upgrades. Similarly, AISC per Ag eq oz increased
45% compared to the fourth quarter of 2015.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 20







Topia Development



For the year ended December 31, 2016,
underground development totaled 7,118 metres, compared to 8,833 metres in 2015, the majority of which was carried out at the Argentina,
15-22, La Prieta and El Rosario mines.



Underground development for the fourth
quarter was 1,833 metres, compared to 2,199 metres in the 2015 comparative period, and focused on the same mines as noted above.



The Company did not undertake exploration
drilling at Topia during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 as the mine has sufficient mineral resources to support a
9.5-year mine life at current production levels.



During 2016, the Company received its
permit for storage of tailings at the Phase II facility from SEMARNAT (the Mexican environmental permitting agency), contingent
on a few requirements including approval of a Study for Change in Use of Soils. The Phase II tailings storage facility entails
a change from wet deposition to dry stack, which best aligns with current environmentally sound practices in the industry. In
order to accommodate the transition to the Phase II tailing storage facility, and to facilitate plant upgrades, the Company temporarily
suspended operations at the Topia processing facility in early December 2016 and milling operations are planned to recommence
prior to the end of the first quarter 2017, subject to receiving approval from SEMARNAT of the above referenced study which the
Company has submitted and is currently under review. The project includes the installation of a thickener and filter presses,
and upgrades to the crushing plant, flotation circuits and ball mills. Mining operations have continued throughout this period,
with mined ore stockpiled for future processing. Meanwhile, efforts at the Phase I tailings storage facility were focused on dewatering
in order to improve stability and allow for the future use of this facility as a contingency measure. Reviews by the regulatory
authorities, coupled with the permitting work undertaken by the Company in connection with the expansion of the Topia tailings
facility, have led to a broader review by PROFEPA (the Mexican environmental compliance authority) of all of the Topia operations’
permitting status and environmental compliance, including the historical tailings dating back to the period prior to Great Panther’s
ownership. In addition, the Topia Mine has been accepted into a voluntary environmental audit program undertaken by PROFEPA. The
audit is expected to commence during March 2017 and to last for several months. The Company anticipates that it will be able to
address any potential gaps in existing compliance through a mitigation plan, however, the Company cannot provide complete assurance
that the PROFEPA review will not lead to a continued or future suspension of operations. Further, if the environmental or technical
reviews identify any non-compliance of the existing facility, there is no assurance that Mexican regulatory authorities will agree
to any mitigation plan proposed by the Company. Further, there is no assurance that SEMARNAT will approve the Company’s
study required for the reactivation of milling operations at Topia.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 21







SELECTED ANNUAL INFORMATION



The following table sets out selected annual financial results
which have been prepared in accordance with IFRS, except as noted:



|(in 000’s, unless otherwise noted)    |  | 2016 |        |   | 2015 |   |        | 2014 | 
|------------------------------------- |  | ---- | ------ | - | ---- | - | ------ | ---- | 
|Revenue                               |  | $    | 61,881 |   |      | $ | 56,218 |      | 
|Average realized silver price ($/oz)1 |  |      | 17.15  |   |      |   | 15.11  |      | 
|Average realized gold price ($/oz)1   |  |      | 1,267  |   |      |   | 1,110  |      | 
|Production costs                      |  |      | 34,153 |   |      |   | 37,802 |      | 
|Mine operating earnings (loss)        |  |      | 22,022 |   |      |   | 4,366  |      | 
|Net loss                              |  |      | (4,118 | ) |      |   | (7,157 | )    | 
|Basic and diluted loss per share      |  |      | (0.03  | ) |      |   | (0.05  | )    | 
|Adjusted EBITDA2                      |  |      | 16,519 |   |      |   | 7,138  |      | 



|                              |  | Dec. 31, 2016 |        |  | Dec. 31, 2015 |  |        | Dec. 31, 2014 | 
|----------------------------- |  | ------------- | ------ |  | ------------- |  | ------ | ------------- | 
|Cash and short-term deposits  |  |               | 56,662 |  |               |  | 13,685 |               | 
|Total assets                  |  |               | 89,441 |  |               |  | 51,553 |               | 
|Total non-current liabilities |  |               | 5,600  |  |               |  | 6,713  |               | 
|Working capital               |  |               | 66,560 |  |               |  | 25,477 |               | 



During 2016, revenue increased by 10%
in comparison to 2015, primarily due to increases in the average realized precious metal prices. The effect of increased metal
prices was partly offset by a 4% decrease in Ag eq oz sold. Revenue in 2015 increased 35% compared to 2014, primarily due to a
42% increase in Ag eq oz sold from 2014 to 2015. This factor was partially offset by the impact of lower average metal prices
realized during 2015.



Total assets at December 31, 2016 increased
$37.9 million from those at December 31, 2015 due mainly to the $35.3 million in net cash raised through financing activities
during the year, as well $13.6 million in cash flows generated from operating activities. These factors were partly offset by
non-cash adjustments to assets such as amortization of $5.4 million and foreign exchange adjustments. Total assets at December
31, 2015 decreased by $3.5 million from those at December 31, 2014. The reduction was primarily due to a $13.6 million increase
in accumulated amortization and depletion, which was partially offset by a $7.1 increase in property, plant and equipment, the
$1.8 million increase in exploration & evaluation assets associated with the acquisition of the option agreement associated
with the CMC, and a $1.2 million increase in current assets.



The net loss recognized by the Company
in 2016 decreased compared to that of 2015, predominantly as a result of an increase in mine operating earnings of $17.7 million,
partly offset by a $14.3 million increase in foreign exchange losses year over year. The net loss recognized by the Company in
2015 decreased compared to the net loss recognized in 2014. The 2015 net loss reflected a $2.3 million impairment charge against
the Company’s exploration & evaluation assets, whereas an $9.0 million impairment was recorded in 2014 against the Company’s
mineral properties, plant and equipment attributed to a decline in silver and gold prices and lower forecast expectations for
future metal prices. In addition, the decrease in net loss for 2015 reflected a $9.1 million improvement in mine operating earnings,
the benefit of a $4.1 million fluctuation in foreign exchange gains and losses, and a $1.6 million reduction in income tax expense.
These factors were partly offset by a $2.8 million increase in EE&D expenses and a $0.6 million increase in G&A expenses.










| | 1 | Average
                                         realized gold and silver prices significantly impact the revenue recognized during each
                                         reporting period.
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | The Company
                                         has included non-IFRS performance measures such as mine operating earnings before non-cash
                                         items, throughout this document. Refer to the Non-IFRS Measures section of this
                                         MD&A for an explanation of these measures and reconciliation to the Company’s
                                         reported financial results in accordance with IFRS. As these are not standardized measures,
                                         they may not be directly comparable to similarly titled measures used by others.
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 22







SUMMARY OF SELECTED QUARTERLY INFORMATION



The table below sets out selected quarterly
financial results which have been prepared in accordance with IFRS, except for mine operating earnings before non-cash items and
adjusted EBITDA, which are non-IFRS measures. The following paragraphs describe the trends in results over the quarters presented
and the factors that have contributed to these trends.



|                                               |  | 2016 |        |   | 2015 |  
|---------------------------------------------- |  | ---- | ------ | - | ---- | -
|(000’s, unless otherwise noted)                |  | Q4   |        |   | Q3   |  
|Revenue                                        |  | $    | 12,515 |   |      | $
|Production costs                               |  |      | 8,039  |   |      |  
|Mine operating earnings before non-cash items1 |  |      | 4,476  |   |      |  
|Amortization and share-based compensation      |  |      | 2,065  |   |      |  
|Mine operating earnings                        |  |      | 2,411  |   |      |  
|Net income (loss) for the period               |  |      | (1,498 | ) |      |  
|Basic and diluted earnings (loss) per share    |  |      | (0.01  | ) |      |  
|Adjusted EBITDA1                               |  |      | 1,376  |   |      |  



Revenue varies based on the quantity of
metal produced and sold, metal prices, terms of sales agreements and, for periods prior to the third quarter of 2016, foreign
exchange rates. The climate in Mexico allows mining and exploration activities to be conducted throughout the year, therefore,
revenue and cost of sales generally do not exhibit variations due to seasonality.



Since the fourth quarter of 2014, the
Company gradually increased its production to greater than one million Ag eq oz per quarter and sustained this level from the
second quarter of 2015 until the second quarter of 2016. The increase to this level of production was primarily due to the ramp-up
of the San Ignacio Mine since the start of commercial production in June 2014. In addition, an increase in average ore grades
(up to and including the first quarter of 2016) at all operations had contributed to the increase in production and lowering of
unit costs. During the third and fourth quarters of 2016, the Company’s production results were affected by three separate
temporary suspensions in operations at the Topia Mine. Since the second quarter of 2016, the Company also experienced some declines
in average ore grades, mainly reflecting variances from modelled mineral resources. The details of tonnes milled, average ore
grade and metal recoveries are discussed in the Mining Operations section.



Revenue showed quarter-over-quarter increases
in the first and second quarters of 2016 as a result of increases in metal production and rising metal prices. For the third and
fourth quarters, declines in production noted above and a weakening of precious metal prices led to declines in revenue quarter-over-quarter.



The relationship between the MXN (in which
the bulk of the Company’s production costs and EE&D expenses are denominated) and the USD (in which the results are
reported) has a significant impact on production costs, and therefore cost of sales, mine operating earnings and net income (loss).
Furthermore, the relationship between the CAD and the USD (in which the results are reported) also has an impact net income as
the majority of the Company’s G&A expenses are denominated in CAD.










| | 1 | The
                                         Company has included the non-IFRS performance measures, mine operating earnings before
                                         non-cash items and Adjusted EBITDA throughout this document. Refer to the Non-IFRS
                                         Measuressection of this MD&A for an explanation of these measures and reconciliation
                                         to the Company’s reported financial results in accordance with IFRS. As these are
                                         not standardized measures, they may not be directly comparable to similarly titled measures
                                         used by others.
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 23







Foreign exchange gains and losses arise
from the translation of foreign-denominated transactions and balances into the relevant functional currencies of the Company and
its subsidiaries. The Company funds its Mexican subsidiaries through USD and CAD loans, while a significant portion of the Company’s
working capital is denominated in USD. Prior to the third quarter of 2016, fluctuations between the USD, MXN and the CAD caused
significant non-cash, unrealized foreign exchange gains and losses associated with the revaluation of foreign currency working
capital and intercompany loan balances of Great Panther and its Mexican subsidiaries. These unrealized gains and losses are recognized
in the consolidated net income of the Company.



During the third quarter of 2016, the
functional currencies of the Company’s parent company and subsidiaries were reassessed as a result of a change in underlying
transactions, events and conditions, includingthe recent USD financings undertaken by the
Company. The USD was determined to be the functional currency of the primary economic environment in which the Canadian parent
company and the majority of its subsidiaries operate. Please refer to the Changes in Accounting Policies section of this
MD&A.



As a result of this change, the foreign
exchange gains and losses reported for the third and fourth quarters of 2016 were much lower than those recognized in prior periods.
Foreign exchange gains and losses recognized during the quarter primarily relate to the revaluation of foreign currency working
capital balances, including foreign currency forward contracts.



The following graph illustrates the fluctuations
in these foreign exchange rates.







Quarterly fluctuations in mine development
expenses have also impacted net income. In accordance with the Company’s accounting policies, mine development expenditures
incurred at the San Ignacio Mine are expensed as incurred. In addition, the Company commenced expensing the Guanajuato Mine development
costs to EE&D expenses at the end of the third quarter of 2015 as the previously-defined Measured & Indicated Resource
of the Guanajuato Mine was fully depleted. As such, there has been a trend of increasing mine development expenses over the past
eight quarters.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 24







Exploration expenses (a component of EE&D
expenses) may vary significantly from quarter to quarter. The majority of these expenses are variable in nature, and fluctuate
as a function of the Company’s planned activities. During the first and second quarters of 2015, the Company negotiated
and concluded two separate transactions whereby it obtained options to earn interests in the Guadalupe de los Reyes Project (the
“GDLR Project”) in Sinaloa, Mexico, and in the CMC. Following this, Great Panther commenced extensive exploration
and evaluation work on each of these properties, with the associated costs being recorded as EE&D expenses within the Company’s
consolidated net income (loss). Effective the fourth quarter of 2015, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $2.3 million
as it determined that the GDLR Project did not warrant further exploration and the Company terminated its option agreement on
February 24, 2016. During the second quarter of 2016, the Company terminated its option agreement associated with the CMC and
recorded an impairment charge of $1.7 million. Notwithstanding, the Company continued with its evaluation of the CMC and incurred
$0.3 million of additional EE&D expenses on the CMC, culminating in the decision by the Company to acquire the CMC.



Other factors that also had a material
impact on the Company’s net income over the previous eight quarters include:



| | · | Beginning
                                         in the fourth quarter of 2015, there was a significant decrease in amortization as the
                                         previously-defined Measured & Indicated Resource for the Guanajuato Mine was fully
                                         depleted during the third quarter of 2015 and the Company ceased capitalization of further
                                         development and commenced expensing these costs from that point forward.
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | During
                                         the fourth quarter of 2016, the Company wrote down of the remaining carrying value of
                                         the Phase I tailings storage facility at Topia.
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



RESULTS OF OPERATIONS



Year ended December 31, 2016



|                                         |  | FY
    2016 |           |   | FY
    2015 |   |         |       | 
|---------------------------------------- |  | ----------- | --------- | - | ----------- | - | ------- | ----- | 
|Sales quantities                         |  | GMC         |           |   | Topia       |   |         | Total | 
|Silver (ounces)                          |  |             | 1,477,696 |   |             |   | 532,556 |       | 
|Gold (ounces)                            |  |             | 21,093    |   |             |   | 424     |       | 
|Lead (tonnes)                            |  |             | -         |   |             |   | 942     |       | 
|Zinc (tonnes)                            |  |             | -         |   |             |   | 1,023   |       | 
|Silver equivalent ounces sold            |  |             | 2,954,567 |   |             |   | 788,166 |       | 
|Revenue (000’s)                          |  |             |           |   |             |   |         |       | 
|Silver revenue                           |  | $           | 25,287    |   |             | $ | 9,188   |       | 
|Gold revenue                             |  |             | 26,749    |   |             |   | 521     |       | 
|Lead revenue                             |  |             | -         |   |             |   | 1,808   |       | 
|Zinc revenue                             |  |             | -         |   |             |   | 2,318   |       | 
|Ore processing revenue and other         |  |             | -         |   |             |   | 410     |       | 
|Smelting and refining charges            |  |             | (2,955    | ) |             |   | (2,323  | )     | 
|Impact of change in functional currency1 |  |             | 750       |   |             |   | 128     |       | 
|Total revenue                            |  | $           | 49,831    |   |             | $ | 12,050  |       | 
|Average realized metal prices & FX rates |  |             |           |   |             |   |         |       | 
|Silver (per ounce)                       |  |             |           |   |             |   |         |       | 
|Gold (per ounce)                         |  |             |           |   |             |   |         |       | 
|Lead (per pound)                         |  |             |           |   |             |   |         |       | 
|Zinc (per pound)                         |  |             |           |   |             |   |         |       | 
|USD/CAD                                  |  |             |           |   |             |   |         |       | 
|USD/MXN                                  |  |             |           |   |             |   |         |       | 








| | 1 | The
                                         change in functional currency was accounted for on a prospective basis, with prior period
                                         comparative information translated to the USD at the foreign exchange rates on July 1,
                                         2016. The July 1, 2016 exchange rates differ from the historical exchange rates used
                                         to calculate the previously-disclosed cost per tonne milled, cash cost and AISC metrics,
                                         requiring an adjustment in the reconciliation for the prior-period comparatives.
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 25







For the year ended December 31, 2016,
the Company earned revenues of $61.9 million, compared to $56.2 million for 2015. The increase in revenue was primarily attributable
to a 14% increase in the average realized prices for silver and gold (as detailed in the table above). This accounted for an $8.0
million improvement in revenues, while the effect of favourable foreign exchange (prior to the change in functional currency on
July 1, 2016) had an estimated positive impact of $0.7 million. In addition, smelting and refining charges, which are netted against
revenue, were $0.6 million lower compared to prior year. These factors were partly offset by the impact of 4% lower metal sales
volumes which reduced revenues by $3.6 million. The lower metal sales volume corresponds to the decrease in production as detailed
in the Mining Operations section of this MD&A.



|(000’s)                                                      |  | FY
    2016 |        |   | FY
    2015 |   |        | %
    Change | 
|------------------------------------------------------------ |  | ----------- | ------ | - | ----------- | - | ------ | ------------ | 
|Revenue                                                      |  | $           | 61,881 |   |             | $ | 56,218 |              | 
|Cost of sales:                                               |  |             |        |   |             |   |        |              | 
|Production costs                                             |  |             | 34,153 |   |             |   | 37,802 |              | 
|Amortization and depletion                                   |  |             | 5,436  |   |             |   | 13,763 |              | 
|Share-based compensation                                     |  |             | 270    |   |             |   | 287    |              | 
|Total cost of sales                                          |  |             | 39,859 |   |             |   | 51,852 |              | 
|Mine operating earnings                                      |  | $           | 22,022 |   |             | $ | 4,366  |              | 
|Mine operating earnings (% of revenue)                       |  |             | 36     | % |             |   | 8      | %            | 
|Add:                                                         |  |             |        |   |             |   |        |              | 
|Amortization and depletion                                   |  |             | 5,436  |   |             |   | 13,763 |              | 
|Share-based compensation                                     |  |             | 270    |   |             |   | 287    |              | 
|Mine operating earnings before non-cash items1               |  | $           | 27,728 |   |             | $ | 18,416 |              | 
|Mine operating earnings before non-cash items (% of revenue) |  |             | 45     | % |             |   | 33     | %            | 



The decrease in production costs was predominantly
attributable to the decrease in unit production costs during the year ended December 31, 2016 compared to 2015, as the USD strengthened
14% against the MXN which had the impact of reducing MXN production costs in USD terms. This was augmented by the impact of the
4% lower metal sales volumes.



Mine operating earnings before non-cash
items for 2016 increased by $9.3 million compared to 2015. This increase was the result of the increase in revenue, combined with
the above noted decrease in production costs.



The decrease in amortization and depletion
for 2016, compared to 2015, was primarily due to the cessation of amortization of the Guanajuato mineral property in the third
quarter of 2015 as it was fully amortized. In addition, there was an increase in the useful lives of certain GMC assets effective
January 1, 2016, and the Topia Mine effective July 1, 2015, as a result of the updated mineral resource estimates issued in February
2016 and August 2015, respectively. These factors were partly offset by the impact of the Company amortizing the remaining carrying
value of the Phase I tailings storage facility at Topia.










| | 1 | The Company
                                         has included non-IFRS performance measures such as mine operating earnings before non-cash
                                         items, throughout this document. Refer to the Non-IFRS Measures section of this
                                         MD&A for an explanation of these measures and reconciliation to the Company’s
                                         reported financial results in accordance with IFRS. As these are not standardized measures,
                                         they may not be directly comparable to similarly titled measures used by others.
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 26







|(000’s)                                                   |  | FY
    2016 |        |   | FY
    2015 |   |        | %
    Change | 
|--------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------- | ------ | - | ----------- | - | ------ | ------------ | 
|General & administrative (G&A) expenses                   |  | $           | 5,813  |   |             | $ | 6,082  |              | 
|Exploration & evaluation, and development (EE&D) expenses |  | $           | 6,127  |   |             | $ | 6,380  |              | 
|Impairment charges                                        |  | $           | 1,679  |   |             | $ | 2,303  |              | 
|Finance and other (income) expense                        |  | $           | 11,012 |   |             | $ | (3,238 | )            | 
|Income tax expense (recovery)                             |  | $           | 1,509  |   |             | $ | (4     | )            | 
|Net income (loss)                                         |  | $           | (4,118 | ) |             | $ | (7,157 | )            | 



The decrease in G&A expenses for the
year ended December 31, 2016 compared to the prior year, was primarily due to a reduction in IT consulting and hosting fees, as
well as a reduction in professional services fees.



EE&D expenses decreased for the year
ended December 31, 2016 compared to the same period in 2015, due to a $0.5 million decrease in the estimate of reclamation provisions,
a $0.2 million decrease in share-based compensation expense, and a $0.2 million net decrease in exploration expenses associated
with the GDLR and Coricancha projects. These items were partly offset by a $0.4 million increase in the Company’s EE&D
expenses associated with the GMC as the Company’s focus in mine development and exploration drilling shifted from the Guanajuato
Mine to the San Ignacio Mine as described in the GMC Development section, and the Company only commenced expensing development
expenditures associated with the Guanajuato Mine part-way through 2015.



The impairment charge recognized during
2016 related to the termination of the CMC option agreement that the Company entered into with Nyrstar in May 2015 and terminated
in May 2016. The impairment charges recorded during 2015 related to the termination of the option agreement associated with the
GDLR Project.



Finance and other expense increased due
to the recognition of $11.1 million in (primarily unrealized) net foreign exchange losses during 2016, compared to a $3.1 million
foreign exchange gain recorded during 2015. Prior to the change in functional currency of the Company and certain of its Mexican
subsidiaries on July 1, 2016, significant foreign exchange differences associated with intercompany balances were recorded and
this represented the main component of the $9.5 million net foreign exchange losses during the first half of the year. The foreign
exchange losses for the year ended December 31, 2016 also include $0.5 million associated with the Company’s foreign currency
forward contracts.



The Company may be subject to significant
non-cash, unrealized foreign exchange gains and losses associated with the revaluation of working capital in the books of the
Company and its Mexican subsidiaries. Please refer to the Summary of Selected Quarterly Information section of this MD&A
for a description of the nature of these net foreign exchange gains and losses.



The net income tax expense for the year
ended December 31, 2016 was attributable to a $1.5 million accrual for special mining duty payable in Mexico (which is charged
at 7.5% of a taxable net income, adjusted for certain factors), $0.4 million in Mexican withholding taxes, as well as $0.2 million
in deferred income tax expense recognized by two of the Company’s Mexican subsidiaries. These factors were partly offset
by a $0.6 million reduction in deferred special mining duty payable.



The $3.0 million decrease in net loss
in 2016 compared to 2015 was mainly due to a $17.7 million increase in mine operating earnings, a $0.3 million decrease in G&A
expenses, a $0.3 million decrease in EE&D expenditures. In addition, the net loss for 2016 included the $1.7 million impairment
charge taken upon termination of the CMC option agreement, whereas the net loss for 2015 reflected a $2.3 million impairment charge
taken on the GDLR Project. These factors were partly offset by a $1.5 million increase in net income tax expense and a $14.3 million
increase in foreign exchange loss.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 27







Adjusted EBITDA increased in 2016 by $9.4
million compared to 2015, primarily due to the $9.3 million increase in mine operating earnings before non-cash items and a $0.5
million decrease in G&A expenses before non-cash items. These factors were partly offset by a $0.4 million increase in EE&D
expenses (net of changes in non-cash share based compensation and changes in estimate of reclamation provisions).



Three months ended December 31, 2016



|                                         |  | Q4 2016 |         |   | Q4 2015 |   |         |       | 
|---------------------------------------- |  | ------- | ------- | - | ------- | - | ------- | ----- | 
|Sales quantities                         |  | GMC     |         |   | Topia   |   |         | Total | 
|Silver (ounces)                          |  |         | 359,947 |   |         |   | 128,481 |       | 
|Gold (ounces)                            |  |         | 4,642   |   |         |   | 110     |       | 
|Lead (tonnes)                            |  |         |         |   |         |   | 247     |       | 
|Zinc (tonnes)                            |  |         |         |   |         |   | 274     |       | 
|Silver equivalent ounces sold            |  |         | 684,864 |   |         |   | 198,484 |       | 
|Revenue (000’s)                          |  |         |         |   |         |   |         |       | 
|Silver revenue                           |  | $       | 5,277   |   |         | $ | 2,046   |       | 
|Gold revenue                             |  |         | 4,973   |   |         |   | 127     |       | 
|Lead revenue                             |  |         | -       |   |         |   | 540     |       | 
|Zinc revenue                             |  |         | -       |   |         |   | 769     |       | 
|Ore processing revenue (custom milling)  |  |         | -       |   |         |   | 91      |       | 
|Smelting and refining charges            |  |         | (704    | ) |         |   | (604    | )     | 
|Impact of change in functional currency1 |  |         | -       |   |         |   | -       |       | 
|Total revenue                            |  | $       | 9,546   |   |         | $ | 2,969   |       | 
|Average realized metal prices & FX rates |  |         |         |   |         |   |         |       | 
|Silver (per ounce)                       |  |         |         |   |         |   |         |       | 
|Gold (per ounce)                         |  |         |         |   |         |   |         |       | 
|Lead (per pound)                         |  |         |         |   |         |   |         |       | 
|Zinc (per pound)                         |  |         |         |   |         |   |         |       | 
|USD/CAD                                  |  |         |         |   |         |   |         |       | 
|USD/MXN                                  |  |         |         |   |         |   |         |       | 



Revenue decreased by 5% in the fourth
quarter of 2016, relative to the fourth quarter of 2015. This was primarily attributable to the 4% decrease in metal sales volumes,
which had the effect of reducing revenue by $0.9 million. The lower metal sales volume was predominantly the result of the lower
gold grades at the GMC, as well as a decrease in production at Topia due to the temporary halt in operations in early December
2016. In addition, revenue in the fourth quarter of 2015 included a $1.3 million effect of favourable foreign exchange rates (prior
to the change in functional currency on July 1, 2016). These negative factors were partly offset by the increase in precious metal
prices, as detailed in the table above, which contributed to a $1.5 million increase in revenue.



Compared to the third quarter of 2016,
revenue decreased 20%, primarily due to the decrease in realized precious metal prices during the fourth quarter of 2016, which
had a negative impact of $3.3 million. In addition, smelting and refining charges, which are netted against revenue, were $0.1
million higher compared to the third quarter of 2016. These negative factors were partly offset by a 2% higher metal sales volumes
which had a positive $0.3 million impact.










| | 1 | The change
                                         in functional currency was accounted for on a prospective basis, with prior period comparative
                                         information translated to the USD at the foreign exchange rates on July 1, 2016. The
                                         July 1, 2016 exchange rates differ from the historical exchange rates used to calculate
                                         the previously-disclosed cost per tonne milled, cash cost and AISC metrics, requiring
                                         an adjustment in the reconciliation for the prior-period comparatives.
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 28







|(000’s)                                                     |  | Q4 2016 |        |   | Q4 2015 |   |        | % Change |  |  | Q3
    2016 |    |  | % Change |       
|----------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------- | ------ | - | ------- | - | ------ | -------- |  |  | ----------- | -- |  | -------- | ------
|Revenue                                                     |  | $       | 12,515 |   |         | $ | 13,142 |          |  |  | (5          | )% |  | $        | 15,631
|Cost of sales:                                              |  |         |        |   |         |   |        |          |  |  |             |    |  |          |       
|Production costs                                            |  |         | 8,039  |   |         |   | 9,382  |          |  |  | (14         | )% |  |          | 8,400 
|Amortization and depletion                                  |  |         | 1,987  |   |         |   | 1,191  |          |  |  | 67          | %  |  |          | 1,083 
|Share-based compensation                                    |  |         | 78     |   |         |   | 98     |          |  |  | (20         | )% |  |          | 76    
|Total cost of sales                                         |  | $       | 10,104 |   |         | $ | 10,671 |          |  |  | (5          | )% |  | $        | 9,559 
|Mine operating earnings (loss)                              |  | $       | 2,411  |   |         | $ | 2,471  |          |  |  | (2          | )% |  | $        | 6,072 
|Mine operating earnings (loss)  (% of revenue)              |  |         | 19     | % |         |   | 19     | %        |  |  |             |    |  |          | 39    
|Add:                                                        |  |         |        |   |         |   |        |          |  |  |             |    |  |          |       
|Amortization and depletion                                  |  | $       | 1,987  |   |         | $ | 1,191  |          |  |  | 67          | %  |  | $        | 1,083 
|Share-based compensation                                    |  |         | 78     |   |         |   | 98     |          |  |  | (20         | )% |  |          | 76    
|Mine operating earnings before non-cash items1              |  | $       | 4,476  |   |         | $ | 3,760  |          |  |  | 19          | %  |  | $        | 7,231 
|Mine operating earnings before non-cash items(% of revenue) |  |         | 36     | % |         |   | 29     | %        |  |  |             |    |  |          | 46    



Production costs decreased 14% for the
fourth quarter of 2016 compared to the fourth quarter of 2015. The decrease was predominantly attributable to the decrease in
unit production costs, as the USD strengthened 15% against the MXN which had the impact of reducing MXN production costs in USD
terms. A 4% reduction in metal sales volumes also contributed to the decline in production costs.



Compared to the third quarter of 2016,
production costs decreased 4%. The decrease was attributable to the decrease in unit production costs during the fourth quarter
of 2016 as the USD strengthened 4% against the MXN which had the impact of reducing MXN production costs in USD terms. This factor
was offset by the 2% higher metal sales volumes relative to the third quarter of 2016, which had an impact of $0.2 million.



Mine operating earnings before non-cash
items increased by $0.7 million relative to the fourth quarter of 2015 due to the $1.3 million decrease in production costs which
exceeded the impact of the $0.6 million decrease in revenue. Relative to the third quarter of 2016, mine operating earnings before
non-cash items were $2.8 million lower due primarily to the decline in revenue.



The increase in amortization and depletion
during the fourth quarter of 2016, compared to the fourth quarter of 2015, was primarily due to the amortization of the remaining
carrying value of the Phase I tailings storage facility at Topia. The amortization and depletion increased compared to the third
quarter of 2016 for same reason as noted above.










| | 1 | The Company
                                         has included non-IFRS performance measures such as mine operating earnings before non-cash
                                         items, throughout this document. Refer to the Non-IFRS Measures section of this
                                         MD&A for an explanation of these measures and reconciliation to the Company’s
                                         reported financial results in accordance with IFRS. As these are not standardized measures,
                                         they may not be directly comparable to similarly titled measures used by others.
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 29









|(000’s)                            |  | Q4
    2016 |        |   | Q4
    2015 |   |        | Change |  |   | Q3
    2016 |   |  | Change |     
|---------------------------------- |  | ----------- | ------ | - | ----------- | - | ------ | ------ |  | - | ----------- | - |  | ------ | ----
|G&A expenses                       |  | $           | 1,662  |   |             | $ | 1,705  |        |  | $ | (43         | ) |  |        | (3  
|EE&D expenses                      |  | $           | 1,286  |   |             | $ | 3,213  |        |  | $ | (1,927      | ) |  |        | (60 
|Impairment charge                  |  | $           | Nil    |   |             | $ | 2,303  |        |  | $ | (2,303      | ) |  |        | (100
|Finance and other income (expense) |  | $           | (695   | ) |             | $ | 1,051  |        |  | $ | (1,746      | ) |  |        | (166
|Income tax expense                 |  | $           | 267    |   |             | $ | 27     |        |  | $ | 240         |   |  |        | 889 
|Net loss for the period            |  | $           | (1,498 | ) |             | $ | (3,725 | )      |  | $ | 2,227       |   |  |        | (60 





G&A expenses for the fourth quarter
of 2016 decreased compared to the same period in 2015 primarily due to lower amortization. Compared to the third quarter of 2016,
G&A expenses increased mainly as a result of costs incurred in order to change to USD reporting, as well as legal fees associated
with ongoing corporate developmentactivities.



EE&D expenses decreased by $1.9 million
in the fourth quarter of 2016 compared to the same period in 2015. During the comparative period, the Company undertook significant
exploration and evaluation programs related to the GDLR and Coricancha projects, while project exploration activity was significantly
less in the fourth quarter of 2016. In addition, there was also a reduction of $0.7 million in EE&D expenses due to non-cash
changes in the estimate of reclamation provisions.



EE&D expenses decreased by $0.2 million
compared to the third quarter of 2016, primarily due to a $0.3 million reduction in non-cash changes in estimate of reclamation
provisions, partly offset by additional costs associated with the evaluation of the CMC.



There were no impairment charges recognized
during the fourth quarter of 2016, while the same quarter in the prior year reflected an impairment charge related to the termination
of the GDLR Project option agreement.



Finance and other expense amounted to
$0.7 million, compared to finance and other income of $1.1 million during the fourth quarter of 2015. The variance was wholly
attributable to foreign exchange gains and losses. During the third quarter of 2016, the Company recognized a $0.9 million foreign
exchange loss.



The Company may be subject to significant
non-cash, unrealized foreign exchange gains and losses associated with the revaluation of working capital in the books of the
Company and its Mexican subsidiaries. Please refer to the Summary of Selected Quarterly Information section of this MD&A
for a description of the nature of these net foreign exchange gains and losses.



The net income tax expense for the fourth
quarter of 2016 was predominantly attributable to an accrual for special mining duty payable in Mexico (which is charged at 7.5%
of a taxable net income, adjusted for certain factors), as well as an accrual for Mexican withholding taxes.



Net loss for the fourth quarter of 2016
amounted to $1.5 million, compared to a net loss of $3.7 million for the fourth quarter of 2015. The improvement in net loss was
primarily due to the $1.9 million reduction in EE&D expenses. In addition, the net loss in the fourth quarter of 2015 reflects
the $2.3 million impairment charge taken on the GDLR Project. These factors were partly offset by a $1.8 million increase in the
foreign exchange loss, a $0.2 million increase in income tax expense and $0.1 million reduction in mine operating earnings.



Net loss for the fourth quarter of 2016
compares to net income of $2.1 million for the third quarter of 2016. The change was primarily due to the $3.7 million reduction
in mine operating earnings and a $0.4 million increase in G&A expenses. These factors were partly offset by a $0.2 million
reduction in EE&D expenses and a $0.1 million decrease in income tax expense. The Company also recorded a foreign exchange
loss that was $0.2 million lower than the foreign exchange loss reported for the third quarter of 2016.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 30







Adjusted EBITDA increased by $1.8 million
in the fourth quarter of 2016, compared to the same period in 2015. The improvement in adjusted EBITDA reflects the $0.7 million
increase in mine operating earnings before non-cash items as well as a $1.1 million decrease in EE&D expenses (net of changes
in non-cash share based compensation and changes in estimate of reclamation provisions).



Adjusted EBITDA decreased by $3.4 million
compared to the third quarter of 2016, primarily due to the $2.8 million decrease in mine operating earnings before non-cash items,
the $0.4 million increase in G&A expenses reported during the fourth quarter of 2016 and a $0.2 million increase in EE&D
expenses (net of changes in non-cash share based compensation and changes in estimate of reclamation provisions).



OUTLOOK



|Production and cash cost guidance |  | FY 2017 Guidance |                                                                |  | FY 2016 Actual |  
|--------------------------------- |  | ---------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -------------- | -
|Total silver equivalent ounces1   |  |                  | 4,000,000
                                         - 4,100,000 |  |                |  
|Total payable silver ounces       |  |                  | 1,950,000
                                         - 2,000,000 |  |                |  
|Cash cost2                        |  |                  | $ 5.00 –
                                         6.00         |  |                | $
|AISC2                             |  |                  | $ 14.00
                                         – 16.00       |  |                | $



For 2017, the Company expects cash cost
to increase due to increases in site costs and increased expenditures on definition drilling aimed at reducing grade variability
and improving mine planning. AISC is also expected to increase due to the increase in cash cost and greater investment in drilling,
development and capital projects. In particular, AISC will reflect the non-recurring capital expenditures in the new tailings
facility at Topia which will primarily be incurred in the first quarter of 2017. As a result, AISC for the first quarter of 2017
is expected to be unusually high.



The Company provides the following guidance for capital expenditures
and EE&D expenses.



|Capex
                                         and EE&D expense guidance (in millions) |  | FY 2017 Guidance |                                                      |  | FY 2016 Actual |  
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- |  | -------------- | -
|Capital expenditures                                                                   |  |                  | $
                                         6.3 – 7.3 |  |                | $
|EE&D – operating mines                                                                 |  |                  | $ 3.5 – 4.5                                          |  |                | $



LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES



|(000’s)                   |  | December
    31, 2016 |        |  | December
    31, 2015 |   |        | Change | 
|------------------------- |  | --------------------- | ------ |  | --------------------- | - | ------ | ------ | 
|Cash and cash equivalents |  | $                     | 41,642 |  |                       | $ | 13,685 |        | 
|Short-term deposits       |  | $                     | 15,020 |  |                       | $ | -      |        | 
|Net working capital       |  | $                     | 66,560 |  |                       | $ | 25,477 |        | 










| | 1 | For 2017
                                         guidance, Ag eq oz have been established using a 70:1 Au:Ag ratio, and ratios of 1:0.0559
                                         and 1:0.676 for the USD price of silver ounces to the USD price for lead and zinc pounds,
                                         respectively. For 2016, Ag eq oz were calculated using a 70:1 Ag:Au ratio, and a ratio
                                         of 1:0.0504 for the USD price of silver ounces to the USD price for both lead and zinc
                                         pounds.
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | Cash
                                         cost and AISC are non-IFRS measures. Refer to the Non-IFRS Measures section of this MD&A
                                         for an explanation of these measures and reconciliation to the Company’s reported
                                         financial results in accordance with IFRS. As these are not standardized measures, they
                                         may not be directly comparable to similarly titled measures used by others.
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 31







Cash and cash equivalents increased significantly during 2016 primarily due to the $33.1
million in proceeds received from financings. In addition, the Company generated positive cash flows from operating activities
before changes in non-cash working capital of $16.0 million, and received $2.2 million from the exercise of stock options. These
factors were partly offset by a $15.0 million increase in short-term deposits (cash invested in term deposits with a maturity exceeding
three months from the date of acquisition), $4.7 million invested in mineral properties, plant and equipment, as well as an increase
in non-cash net working capital of $2.3 million, and a negative $1.3 million foreign exchange adjustment on cash balances.



The significant increase in net working
capital during 2016 reflects the above noted net proceeds from financings and exercise of stock options. In addition, the Company
generated $13.6 million in cash flows from operating activities. These factors were partly offset by $4.7 million cash used for
investing in non-current assets, and foreign exchange losses recognized on net working capital balances.



Operating activities



For the year ended December 31, 2016,
cash flows provided by operating activities amounted to $13.6 million, compared to $5.9 million in 2015. The $7.7 million increase
in cash flows provided by operating activities was primarily due to a $9.3 million increase in mine operating earnings before
non-cash items and a $0.5 million decrease in G&A expenses before non-cash items. These factors were partly offset by a $1.2
million increase in non-cash net working capital, a $0.7 million fluctuation in net realized foreign exchange gains and losses
and a $0.4 million increase in EE&D expenses (net of changes in non-cash share based compensation and changes in estimate
of reclamation provisions).



For the quarter ended December 31, 2016,
cash flows provided by operating activities amounted to $5.5 million, compared to a negative $0.2 million for the fourth quarter
of 2015. The $5.7 million increase in cash flows provided by operating activities was primarily due to a $3.8 million cash inflow
associated with a reduction in non-cash net working capital, a $0.7 million increase in mine operating earnings before non-cash
items, a $1.3 million decrease in EE&D expenses (net of changes in non-cash share based compensation and changes in estimate
of reclamation provisions) and a $0.2 million decrease in income taxes paid. These positive factors were partly offset by a $0.4
million fluctuation in net realized foreign exchange gains and losses.



Investing activities



Following the completion of the Company’s bought deal financing, the Company invested $15.0 million
in short-term deposits (term deposits with a maturity date exceeding three months from the date of acquisition). The Company also
invested $4.7 million in mineral properties, plant and equipment for the year ended December 31, 2016. Investing activities during
the year ended December 31, 2015 included $4.9 million
of additions to mineral properties, plant and equipment ($2.1 million of which represented capitalized mine development incurred
at the Guanajuato Mine prior to the Company ceasing to capitalize such expenditures), $1.7 million in additions to exploration
and evaluation assets related to the CMC option agreement, and the acquisition of Cangold for $0.8 million.



For the fourth quarter of 2016, the Company invested $15.0 million cash in short-term deposits and $1.8million in mineral property, plant and equipment, compared to $0.7 million invested in mineral properties, plant and equipment
during the comparative period in 2015.



Financing activities



Cash flows provided by financing activities
amounted to $35.3 million during 2016, compared to $7,000 in 2015. These cash inflows were primarily attributed to $33.1 million
of net proceeds received from a bought deal financing and the ATM Offering, with the remainder representing proceeds from the
exercise of stock options during the period.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 32







Trends in liquidity and capital resources



The Company raised $5.7 million in gross
proceeds from a ATM Offering prior to termination of the facility on December 31, 2016. The Company also closed a bought deal
financing during the third quarter of 2016, raising gross proceeds of $29.9 million. The Company intends to use the net proceeds
of these financings to fund operating, development and exploration expenditures at the Company’s mining operations and projects,
for possible acquisitions, and for general corporate and working capital purposes. To the date of this MD&A, the net proceeds
of the ATM Offering and the bought deal offering have not been used and have been placed in short-term bank guaranteed deposits
or other similarly secure deposits.



The Company anticipates that cash flows
generated from mining activities, along with net working capital, will be sufficient to fund the Company’s operations without
requiring any additional capital to meet its planned growth and to fund investment and exploration, evaluation, and development
activities for the foreseeable future. However, this is highly dependent on metal prices and the ability of the Company to maintain
cost and grade controls at its operations, and subject to changes in the Company’s growth plans and strategy, including
plans for the CMC which are in the initial stages. The Company has stated its objective to grow by acquisition and opportunities
to make such acquisitions may require additional capital.



The Company’s operating cash flows
are very sensitive to the price of silver and gold, foreign exchange rate fluctuations, as well as ore grade fluctuations, and
the cash-flow outlook provided in the above paragraph may vary significantly. Spending plans may also be adjusted in response
to changes in operating cash-flow expectations. An increase in average silver prices and gold prices from current levels may result
in an increase in planned expenditures in 2017 and, conversely, weaker average silver prices and gold prices could result in a
reduction of planned expenditures.



The Company has no debt, other than trade
and other payables. The Company has a $10.0 million credit facility from Auramet International LLC (“Auramet”). The
facility expires on June 30, 2017 and bears interest at a rate of LIBOR plus 5%. The Company has not drawn down any amounts on
this credit facility. In addition, Auramet has also provided the Company with a $0.5 million margin credit facility to support
entering into any derivative instruments associated with sales of metals marketed to parties other than Auramet. Such arrangements
would entail pricing of the Company’s produced metals in advance of customary periods of pricing and settlement which are
typically two to three months from the date of production. The Company does not enter into any long-term hedging arrangement in
respect of its silver and gold production.



Contractual Obligations



|(000’s)                                    |  | Total |       |  | 1
    year |   |       | 2-3
    years |  |   | 4-5
    years |  |  | Thereafter |      
|------------------------------------------ |  | ----- | ----- |  | ---------- | - | ----- | ------------- |  | - | ------------- |  |  | ---------- | -----
|Operating lease payments                   |  | $     | 1,378 |  |            | $ | 238   |               |  | $ | 454           |  |  | $          | 445  
|Equipment purchases                        |  |       | 816   |  |            |   | 816   |               |  |   | -             |  |  |            | -    
|Drilling services                          |  |       | 73    |  |            |   | 73    |               |  |   | -             |  |  |            | -    
|Consulting                                 |  |       | 6     |  |            |   | 6     |               |  |   | -             |  |  |            | -    
|Reclamation and remediation (undiscounted) |  |       | 4,670 |  |            |   | -     |               |  |   | 480           |  |  |            | 697  
|Total                                      |  | $     | 6,943 |  |            | $ | 1,133 |               |  | $ | 934           |  |  | $          | 1,142



Off-Balance sheet arrangements



Other than as disclosed, the Company had
no material off-balance sheet arrangements as at the date of this MD&A, that have, or are reasonably likely to have, a current
or future effect on the financial performance or financial condition of the Company.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 33







TRANSACTIONS WITH RELATED PARTIES



During 2016, the Company’s
key management included the Company’s Directors, the President and CEO, the COO, the CFO, and two Vice Presidents. The compensation
paid or payable to key management for the year ended December 31, 2016 was $2.9 million (2015 - $2.8 million). The Company is
committed to making severance payments amounting to approximately $1.8 million to certain officers and management in the event
that there is a change in control of the Company.



CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES



The preparation of the consolidated financial
statements in conformity with IFRS requires management to make judgments, estimates and assumptions which affect the reported
amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial
statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Estimates are based on historical experience
and other factors considered to be reasonable, and are reviewed on an ongoing basis. Actual results may differ from these estimates.
Revisions to accounting estimates are recognized in the period in which the estimates are revised and in any future periods affected.



The Company has identified the following
areas where estimates and assumptions are made and where actual results may differ from the estimates under different assumptions
and conditions and may materially affect financial results of the Company’s statement of financial position reported in
future periods.



Resource estimation



The accuracy of resource estimates is
a function of the quantity and quality of available data and assumptions made and judgments used in the geological and engineering
interpretation, and may be subject to revision based on various factors. Changes in resource estimates may impact the carrying
value of mineral property, plant and equipment, the calculation of amortization and depletion, the capitalization of mine development
costs, and the timing of cash flows related to reclamation and remediation provision.



Useful lives of mineral properties,
plant and equipment



The Topia Mine mineral property
is depleted using the straight-line method over the estimated remaining life of the mine. The Company estimates the remaining
life of its producing mineral properties on an annual basis using a combination of quantitative and qualitative factors including
historical results, mineral resource estimates, and management’s intent to operate the property. The estimated remaining
life of the producing mineral property is used to calculate amortization and depletion expense, assess impairment charges and
the carrying values of assets, and for forecasting the timing of the payment of reclamation and remediation costs.



There are numerous uncertainties
inherent in the estimation of the remaining lives of the producing mineral properties, and assumptions that are valid at the time
of estimation may change significantly when new information becomes available. Changes in the forecast prices of commodities,
exchange rates, or production costs may change the economic status of the resources, estimates of production from areas not included
in the NI 43-101 reports, and management’s intent to operate the property and may ultimately have a material impact on the
estimated remaining lives of the properties.



Reclamation and remediation provisions



The amounts recorded for reclamation
and remediation provisions are based on estimates prepared by third party environmental specialists, if available, or by persons
within the Company who have the relevant skills and experience. These estimates are based on remediation activities required by
environmental laws in Mexico, the expected timing of cash flows, and the pre-tax risk free interest rates on which the estimated
cash flows have been discounted. These estimates also include an assumption of the rate at which costs may inflate in future periods.
Actual results could differ from these estimates. The estimates require extensive judgment about the nature, cost and timing of
the work to be completed, and may change with future changes to costs, environmental laws and regulations and remediation practices.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 34







Review of asset carrying values and assessment of impairment



The Company reviews each asset
or cash generating unit at each reporting date to determine whether there are any indicators of impairment. If any such indication
exists, a formal estimate of recoverable amount is performed and an impairment loss is recognized to the extent that the carrying
amount exceeds the recoverable amount. The recoverable amount of an asset or cash generating unit is measured at the higher of
fair value less costs to sell and value in use.



The determination of fair value
and value in use requires management to make estimates and assumptions about expected production and sales volumes, metal prices,
ore tonnage and grades, recoveries, operating costs, reclamation and remediation costs, future capital expenditures and appropriate
discount rates for future cash flows. The estimates and assumptions are subject to risk and uncertainty, and as such there is
the possibility that changes in circumstances will alter these projections, which may impact the recoverable amount of the assets.
In such circumstances, some or all of the carrying value of the assets may be further impaired or the impairment charge reduced
with the impact recorded in the statement of comprehensive income.



Revenue from concentrate sales



Revenue from the sale of metals
in concentrate is recorded at the time when it is probable that the economic benefits associated with the transaction will flow
to the Company, the risks and rewards of ownership are transferred to the customer and the revenue can be reliably measured. Variations
between the sales price recorded at the initial recognition date and the actual final sales price at the settlement date caused
by changes in market metals prices result in an embedded derivative in the related trade accounts receivable. The embedded derivative
is recorded at fair value each period until final settlement occurs, with changes in fair value classified as a component of revenue.
During periods of high price volatility, the effect of mark-to-market price adjustments related to the concentrate shipments which
remain to be settled could be significant. In addition, actual settlement prices could vary significantly from the estimated prices
or forward prices at each reporting date.



Income taxes and recoverability of deferred tax assets



In assessing the probability of
realizing income tax assets, the Company makes estimates related to expected future taxable income, potential tax planning opportunities,
estimated timing of reversals of temporary differences, and the likelihood that tax positions taken will be sustained upon examination
by applicable tax authorities. Where applicable tax laws and regulations are unclear or subject to ongoing varying interpretations,
it is reasonably possible that changes in these estimates can occur which may materially affect the amounts of income tax assets
recognized. In addition, future changes in tax laws could limit the Company’s ability to realize the benefits from deferred
tax assets.



CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING POLICIES



The Company has not adopted any new accounting
standards for the year ended December 31, 2016 that has had a material impact on the Company’s financial results, except
for the change in presentation currency from the CAD to the USD, as disclosed in note 3(c) of the audited consolidated financial
statements for the year ended December 31, 2016.



The following are accounting standards
anticipated to be effective January 1, 2017 or later:



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 35







IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with
Customers



In May 2014, the IASB issued a new IFRS
15 Revenue from contracts with customers. The standard contains a single model that applies to contracts with customers and two
approaches to recognizing revenue: at a point in time or over time. The model features a contract-based five-step analysis of
transactions to determine whether, how much and when revenue is recognized. New estimates and judgmental thresholds have been
introduced, which may affect the amount and/or timing of revenue recognized. In September 2015, the IASB deferred the effective
date of the standard to annual periods beginning on or after January 1, 2018, with earlier application permitted. The Company
is currently evaluating the impact that these standards are expected to have on its consolidated financial statements.



IFRS 9 Financial Instruments



In July 2014, the IASB issued the final
version of IFRS 9 Financial Instruments which reflects all phases of the financial instruments project and replaces IAS 39 Financial
Instruments: Recognition and Measurement, and all previous versions of IFRS 9. The standard introduces new requirements for classification
and measurement, impairment, and hedge accounting. New disclosure requirements will apply. IFRS 9 is effective for annual periods
beginning on or after January 1, 2018, with early application permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact these
standards are expected to have on its consolidated financial statements.



IFRS 16 Leases



In January 2016, the IASB issued IFRS
16 Leases, which will replace IAS 17 Leases. This standard introduces a single lessee accounting model and requires a lessee to
recognize assets and liabilities for all leases with a term of more than twelve months, unless the underlying asset is of low
value. A lessee is required to recognize a right-of-use asset representing its right to use the underlying asset and a lease liability
representing its obligation to make lease payments. The standard will be effective for annual periods beginning on or after January
1, 2019, but earlier application is permitted for entities that apply IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers at or before
the date of initial adoption of IFRS 16. The extent of the impact of adoption of the standard has not yet been determined.



There are no other IFRS or IFRIC interpretations
that are not yet effective that would be expected to have a material impact.



FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS



|(000’s)                   |  | Fair
    value (1) |        |   | Basis of measurement |                                               | Associated risks
|------------------------- |  | ------------------ | ------ | - | -------------------- | --------------------------------------------- | ----------------
|Cash and cash equivalents |  | $                  | 41,642 |   |                      | Amortized cost                                |                 
|Short-term deposits       |  | $                  | 15,020 |   |                      | Amortized cost                                |                 
|Marketable securities     |  | $                  | 5      |   |                      | Fair value through other comprehensive income |                 
|Trade receivables         |  | $                  | 5,395  |   |                      | Fair value through profit and loss            |                 
|Other receivables         |  | $                  | 438    |   |                      | Amortized cost                                |                 
|Derivative instruments    |  | $                  | (536   | ) |                      | Fair value through profit and loss            |                 
|Trade and other payables  |  | $                  | (6,017 | ) |                      | Amortized cost                                |                 



The Company is exposed in varying degrees
to a number of risks from financial instruments. Management’s close involvement in the operations allows for the identification
of risks and variances from expectations. The types of risk exposure and the way in which such exposures are managed by the Company
are provided in note 16 of the annual audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2016.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 36







SECURITIES OUTSTANDING



As of the date of this MD&A, the Company
had 167,718,038 common shares issued, 9,343,750 warrants and 8,268,847 options outstanding.



CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES



Disclosure controls and procedures within
the Company have been designed to provide reasonable assurance that all relevant information is identified to its President and
Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), its Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”) to ensure appropriate and timely
decisions are made regarding public disclosure.



Internal controls over financial reporting
have been designed by management, under the supervision of, and with the participation of the Company's CEO and CFO, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of the Company’s financial reporting and its preparation of financial statements
for external purposes in accordance with IFRS.



Management’s Report on Disclosure
Controls and Procedures



Management, under the supervision of and
with the participation of the Company's CEO and CFO, evaluated the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures
and concluded, as at December 31, 2016, that such disclosure controls and procedures were effective.



Management’s Report on Internal
Controls over Financial Reporting



Management, under the supervision of and
with the participation of the Company’s CEO and CFO, evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s internal controls
over financial reporting. In making this evaluation, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations
of the Treadway Commissions (“COSO”) in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013). Based on that evaluation,
management and the CEO and CFO have concluded that, as at December 31, 2016, the Company’s internal controls over financial
reporting were effective.



Changes in Internal Controls over Financial
Reporting



During the year ended December 31, 2016,
the Company employed additional management review controls in executing the change in functional currency and the change in presentation
currency as disclosed in note 3(c) of the audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2016. There
have been no other changes to the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting during the year ended December 31,
2016 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, its internal controls over financial reporting.
Any system of internal control over financial reporting, no matter how well designed, has inherent limitations. Therefore, even
those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial preparation and presentation.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 37







NON-IFRS MEASURES



The Company has included certain non-IFRS
performance measures throughout this MD&A, including cost per tonne milled, cash cost, cash cost per Ag eq oz, AISC, AISC
per Ag eq oz and mine operating earnings before non-cash items, each as defined in this section. The Company employs these measures
internally to measure its operating and financial performance and to assist in business decision making. The Company believes
that, in addition to conventional measures prepared in accordance with IFRS, certain investors and other stakeholders also use
these non-IFRS measures as information to evaluate the Company’s operating and financial performance. As there are no standardized
methods of calculating these non-IFRS measures, the Company’s methods may differ from those used by others and, accordingly,
the use of these measures may not be directly comparable to similarly titled measures used by others. Accordingly, these non-IFRS
measures are intended to provide additional information and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures
of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS.



EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA



EBITDA is a non-IFRS measure that provides
an indication of the Company’s continuing capacity to generate income from operations before taking into account management’s
financing decisions and costs of amortizing capital assets. Accordingly, EBITDA comprises net income excluding interest expense,
interest income, amortization and depletion, and income taxes.



Adjusted EBITDA is also a non-IFRS measure
in which EBITDA is adjusted to exclude share-based compensation expense, foreign exchange gains or losses, impairment charges,
changes in reclamation estimates recorded in EE&D, and non-recurring items. Foreign exchange gains or losses may consist of
both realized and unrealized gains or losses. Under IFRS, entities must reflect in compensation expense the cost of share-based
compensation. In the Company’s circumstances, share-based compensation can involve a significant accrual of amounts that
will not be settled in cash but are settled by the issuance of shares in exchange. The Company discloses adjusted EBITDA to aid
in understanding of the results of the Company and is meant to provide further information about the Company’s financial
results to investors.



|(000’s)                                                               |  |   | Q4
                                         2016 |   |  |   | Q4
                                         2015 |   |  |   | FY
                                         2016 |   |  |   | FY
                                         2015 |  
|--------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | - | ------------------------------------------------ | - |  | - | ------------------------------------------------ | - |  | - | ------------------------------------------------ | - |  | - | ------------------------------------------------ | -
|Loss for the period                                                   |  | $ | (1,498                                           | ) |  | $ | (3,725                                           | ) |  | $ | (4,118                                           | ) |  | $ | (7,157                                           | )
|Income tax expense (recovery)                                         |  |   | 267                                              |   |  |   | 27                                               |   |  |   | 1,509                                            |   |  |   | (4                                               | )
|Interest income                                                       |  |   | (107                                             | ) |  |   | (28                                              | ) |  |   | (225                                             | ) |  |   | (223                                             | )
|Interest expense                                                      |  |   | 25                                               |   |  |   | 25                                               |   |  |   | 99                                               |   |  |   | 131                                              |  
|Amortization and depletion of mineral properties, plant and equipment |  |   | 2,005                                            |   |  |   | 1,244                                            |   |  |   | 5,576                                            |   |  |   | 13,963                                           |  
|EBITDA                                                                |  | $ | 692                                              |   |  | $ | (2,457                                           | ) |  | $ | 2,841                                            |   |  | $ | 6,710                                            |  
|Foreign exchange loss (gain)                                          |  |   | 730                                              |   |  |   | (1,037                                           | ) |  |   | 11,135                                           |   |  |   | (3,121                                           | )
|Share-based compensation                                              |  |   | 233                                              |   |  |   | 329                                              |   |  |   | 1,026                                            |   |  |   | 946                                              |  
|Changes in reclamation estimates recorded in EE&D                     |  |   | (279                                             | ) |  |   | 435                                              |   |  |   | (162                                             | ) |  |   | 300                                              |  
|Impairment charges                                                    |  |   | -                                                |   |  |   | 2,303                                            |   |  |   | 1,679                                            |   |  |   | 2,303                                            |  
|Adjusted EBITDA                                                       |  | $ | 1,376                                            |   |  | $ | (427                                             | ) |  | $ | 16,519                                           |   |  | $ | 7,138                                            |  



Mine operating earnings before non-cash
items



Mine operating earnings before non-cash
items is a non-IFRS measure that provides a measure of the Company’s mine operating earnings on a cash basis. This measure
is provided in order to better assess the cash generation ability of the Company’s operations, before G&A expenses and
EE&D expenses. A reconciliation of mine operating earnings is provided in the Results of Operations section.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 38







Cost per tonne milled



The Company uses the non-IFRS measure
of cost per tonne milled to manage and evaluate operating performance at each of its mines. Cost per tonne milled is calculated
based on the total production costs on a sales basis, adjusted for changes in inventory, to arrive at total production costs that
relate to metal production during the period. These total production costs are then divided by the number of tonnes milled during
the period.



Management believes that the Company’s
ability to control cost per tonne milled is one of its key performance indicators of results of operations. The Company believes
this measure provides investors and analysts with useful information about its underlying cost of operations and how management
controls those costs.



To facilitate a better understanding of
this measure as calculated by the Company, a detailed reconciliation between cost per tonne milled and the Company’s cost
of sales as reported in the Company’s consolidated statements of comprehensive income is provided below.



|(000’s,
    unless otherwise noted)      |  | GMC         |         |   | Topia       |   |         | Consolidated | 
|---------------------------------------- |  | ----------- | ------- | - | ----------- | - | ------- | ------------ | 
|                                         |  | Q4
    2016 |         |   | Q4
    2015 |   |         | Q4
    2016  | 
|Production costs (sales basis)           |  | $           | 5,807   |   |             | $ | 6,956   |              | 
|Change in concentrate inventory          |  |             | 460     |   |             |   | 331     |              | 
|Impact of change in functional currency1 |  |             | -       |   |             |   | (173    | )            | 
|Production costs (production basis)      |  |             | 6,267   |   |             | $ | 7,114   |              | 
|Tonnes milled, including custom milling  |  |             | 81,518  |   |             |   | 79,651  |              | 
|Cost per tonne milled                    |  | $           | 77      |   |             | $ | 89      |              | 
|                                         |  |             | FY 2016 |   |             |   | FY 2015 |              | 
|Production costs (sales basis)           |  | $           | 25,246  |   |             | $ | 27,914  |              | 
|Change in concentrate inventory          |  |             | (70     | ) |             |   | (191    | )            | 
|Impact of change in functional currency1 |  |             | (225    | ) |             |   | 571     |              | 
|Production costs (production basis)      |  | $           | 24,951  |   |             | $ | 28,294  |              | 
|Tonnes milled, including custom milling  |  |             | 320,903 |   |             |   | 309,944 |              | 
|Cost per tonne milled                    |  | $           | 78      |   |             | $ | 91      |              | 



Cash cost



The Company uses the non-IFRS measure
of cash cost to manage and evaluate operating performance at each of its mines. It is a widely-reported measure in the silver
mining industry as a benchmark for performance, but does not have a standardized meaning. Cash cost is calculated based on the
total cash operating costs with the deduction of revenues attributable to sales of by-product metals net of the respective smelting
and refining charges. By-products consist of gold at the GMC, and gold, lead and zinc at Topia.



Management believes that the Company’s
ability to control cash cost is one of the key performance indicators for its operations. Having low cash cost facilitates profitability
even during times of declining commodity prices and provides more flexibility in responding to changing market conditions. In
addition, a profitable operation results in the generation of positive cash flows, which then improves the Company’s financial
condition. The Company believes these measures provide investors and analysts with useful information about its underlying cash
cost of operations and the impact of by-product revenue on the Company’s cost structure and is a relevant metric used to
understand the Company’s operating profitability and ability to generate cash flow.








| | 1 | The change
                                         in functional currency was accounted for on a prospective basis, with prior period comparative
                                         information translated to the USD at the foreign exchange rates on July 1, 2016. The
                                         July 1, 2016 exchange rates differ from the historical exchange rates used to calculate
                                         the previously-disclosed cost per tonne milled, cash cost and AISC metrics, requiring
                                         an adjustment in the reconciliation for the prior-period comparatives.
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 39







The Company’s primary business is
silver production and its future development and current operations focus on maximizing returns from silver production, and other
metal production is associated with the silver production process. Accordingly, gold, zinc and lead produced from operations are
considered by-products. As a result, the Company’s non-IFRS cost performance measures are disclosed on a per payable silver
ounce basis. When deriving the production costs associated with an ounce of silver, the Company includes by-product credits from
gold, zinc and lead sales that are associated with the silver production process, thereby allowing the Company’s management
and other stakeholders to assess the net costs of silver production.



To facilitate a better understanding of
this measure as calculated by the Company, a detailed reconciliation between the cash cost and the Company’s cost of sales
as reported in the Company’s consolidated statements of comprehensive income is provided below. A breakdown is provided
as to how the by-product revenues applied are attributed to the individual by-product metals.



|                                                |  | GMC     |         |   | Topia   |   |         | Consolidated | 
|----------------------------------------------- |  | ------- | ------- | - | ------- | - | ------- | ------------ | 
|(000’s, unless otherwise noted)                 |  | Q4 2016 |         |   | Q4 2015 |   |         | Q4 2016      | 
|Production costs                                |  | $       | 5,807   |   |         | $ | 6,956   |              | 
|Smelting and refining charges                   |  |         | 704     |   |         |   | 741     |              | 
|Revenue from custom milling                     |  |         | -       |   |         |   | -       |              | 
|Cash operating costs                            |  | $       | 6,511   |   |         | $ | 7,697   |              | 
|Gross by-product revenue1                       |  |         |         |   |         |   |         |              | 
|Gold by-product revenue                         |  |         | (4,973  | ) |         |   | (5,258  | )            | 
|Lead by-product revenue                         |  |         | -       |   |         |   | -       |              | 
|Zinc by-product revenue                         |  |         | -       |   |         |   | -       |              | 
|                                                |  | $       | 1,538   |   |         | $ | 2439    |              | 
|Impact of change in functional currency2        |  |         | -       |   |         |   | (151    | )            | 
|Cash operating costs, net of by-product revenue |  | $       | 1,538   |   |         | $ | 2,288   |              | 
|Payable silver ounces sold                      |  |         | 359,947 |   |         |   | 349,661 |              | 
|Cash cost                                       |  | $       | 4.27    |   |         | $ | 6.54    |              | 










| | 1 | Gross
                                         by-product revenue is defined as revenue from the by-products of silver, specifically
                                         gold at GMC and gold, lead and zinc at Topia, net of the respective smelting and refining
                                         charges and net of mining duties calculated on the applicable gross revenue. The by-product
                                         revenues attributable to each by-product metal are included.
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2 | The
change in functional currency was accounted for on a prospective basis, with prior period comparative information translated to
the USD at the foreign exchange rates on July 1, 2016. The July 1, 2016 exchange rates differ from the historical exchange rates
used to calculate the previously-disclosed cost per tonne milled, cash cost and AISC metrics, requiring an adjustment in the reconciliation
for the prior-period comparatives.
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 40







|(000’s, unless otherwise noted)                 |  | GMC     |           |   | Topia   |   |           | Consolidated | 
|----------------------------------------------- |  | ------- | --------- | - | ------- | - | --------- | ------------ | 
|                                                |  | FY 2016 |           |   | FY 2015 |   |           | FY 2016      | 
|Production costs                                |  | $       | 25,246    |   |         | $ | 27,914    |              | 
|Smelting and refining charges                   |  |         | 2,955     |   |         |   | 3,227     |              | 
|Revenue from custom milling                     |  |         | -         |   |         |   | -         |              | 
|Cash operating costs                            |  | $       | 28,201    |   |         | $ | 31,141    |              | 
|Gross by-product revenue1                       |  |         |           |   |         |   |           |              | 
|Gold by-product revenue                         |  |         | (26,749   | ) |         |   | (22,235   | )            | 
|Lead by-product revenue                         |  |         | -         |   |         |   | -         |              | 
|Zinc by-product revenue                         |  |         | -         |   |         |   | -         |              | 
|                                                |  | $       | 1,452     |   |         | $ | 8,906     |              | 
|Impact of change in functional currency2        |  |         | (195      | ) |         |   | 694       |              | 
|Cash operating costs, net of by-product revenue |  | $       | 1,257     |   |         | $ | 9,600     |              | 
|Payable silver ounces sold                      |  |         | 1,477,695 |   |         |   | 1,663,893 |              | 
|Cash cost                                       |  | $       | 0.85      |   |         | $ | 5.77      |              | 



Cash cost per Ag eq oz



Cash cost per Ag eq oz is calculated based
on the total cash operating costs divided by silver equivalent ounces sold. The cash cost per Ag eq oz calculation does notdeduct revenues attributable to sales of by-product metals from the costs associated with metal production process, thereby
allowing the Company’s management and other stakeholders to assess the total costs associated with all metal production.
Management believes this non-IFRS measure provides investors and analysts with useful information about its underlying cash cost
of operations as it is not influenced by fluctuations in metal prices.



To facilitate a better understanding of
this measure as calculated by the Company, a detailed reconciliation between the cash cost per Ag eq oz and the Company’s
cost of sales as reported in the Company’s consolidated statements of comprehensive income is provided below.



|(000’s, unless otherwise noted)          |  | GMC     |         |  | Topia   |   |         | Consolidated | 
|---------------------------------------- |  | ------- | ------- |  | ------- | - | ------- | ------------ | 
|                                         |  | Q4 2016 |         |  | Q4 2015 |   |         | Q4 2016      | 
|Production costs                         |  | $       | 5,807   |  |         | $ | 6,956   |              | 
|Smelting and refining charges            |  |         | 704     |  |         |   | 741     |              | 
|Revenue from custom milling              |  |         | -       |  |         |   | -       |              | 
|                                         |  | $       | 6,511   |  |         | $ | 7,697   |              | 
|Impact of change in functional currency2 |  |         | -       |  |         |   | (151    | )            | 
|Cash operating costs                     |  | $       | 6,511   |  |         | $ | 7,546   |              | 
|Silver equivalent ounces sold            |  |         | 684,864 |  |         |   | 695,071 |              | 
|Cash cost per Ag eq oz                   |  | $       | 9.51    |  |         | $ | 10.86   |              | 










| | 1 | Gross
                                         by-product revenue is defined as revenue from the by-products of silver, specifically
                                         gold at GMC and gold, lead and zinc at Topia, net of the respective smelting and refining
                                         charges and net of mining duties calculated on the applicable gross revenue. The by-product
                                         revenues attributable to each by-product metal are included.
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | The change
                                         in functional currency was accounted for on a prospective basis, with prior period comparative
                                         information translated to the USD at the foreign exchange rates on July 1, 2016. The
                                         July 1, 2016 exchange rates differ from the historical exchange rates used to calculate
                                         the previously-disclosed cost per tonne milled, cash cost and AISC metrics, requiring
                                         an adjustment in the reconciliation for the prior-period comparatives.
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 41







|(000’s, unless otherwise noted)          |  | GMC     |           |   | Topia   |   |           | Consolidated | 
|---------------------------------------- |  | ------- | --------- | - | ------- | - | --------- | ------------ | 
|                                         |  | FY 2016 |           |   | FY 2015 |   |           | FY 2016      | 
|Production costs                         |  | $       | 25,246    |   |         | $ | 27,914    |              | 
|Smelting and refining charges            |  |         | 2,955     |   |         |   | 3,227     |              | 
|Revenue from custom milling              |  |         | -         |   |         |   | -         |              | 
|                                         |  | $       | 28,201    |   |         | $ | 31,141    |              | 
|Impact of change in functional currency2 |  |         | (195      | ) |         |   | 694       |              | 
|Cash operating costs                     |  | $       | 28,006    |   |         | $ | 31,835    |              | 
|Silver equivalent ounces sold            |  |         | 2,954,567 |   |         |   | 2,966,641 |              | 
|Cash cost per Ag eq oz                   |  | $       | 9.48      |   |         | $ | 10.73     |              | 



All-in sustaining cost (AISC)



AISC is a non-IFRS measure and has been
calculated based on World Gold Council (“WGC”) guidance released in 2013. The WGC is not a regulatory organization
and does not have the authority to develop accounting standards for disclosure requirements. The Company believes that the disclosure
of this measure provides a broader measure of the cost of producing an ounce of silver at its operations as the measure includes
sustaining capital and EE&D expenditures, G&A costs, and other costs not commonly included in the cost of production and
therefore not included in cash cost.



AISC starts with cash cost net of by-product
revenues and adds G&A expenditures inclusive of share-based compensation (“SBC”), accretion of reclamation provision,
sustaining exploration and evaluation expenses, sustaining mine development costs and sustaining capital expenditures. Sustaining
expenditures are those costs incurred to sustain and maintain existing assets at current productive capacity and constant planned
levels of productive output. Excluded are non-sustaining capital expenditures, which result in a material increase in the life
of assets, materially increase resources or reserves, productive capacity, future earning potential, or result in significant
improvements in recovery or grade.



|(000’s,
    unless otherwise noted)                           |  | GMC     |         |  | Topia   |   |         | Corporate |  |   | Consolidated | 
|------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------- | ------- |  | ------- | - | ------- | --------- |  | - | ------------ | 
|                                                              |  | Q4 2016 |         |  | Q4 2015 |   |         | Q4 2016   |  |   | Q4 2015      | 
|Cash operating costs, net of by-product revenue 1             |  | $       | 1,538   |  |         | $ | 2,288   |           |  | $ | 1,309        | 
|G&A costs                                                     |  |         | -       |  |         |   | -       |           |  |   | -            | 
|Share-based compensation                                      |  |         | -       |  |         |   | -       |           |  |   | -            | 
|Accretion                                                     |  |         | 2       |  |         |   | 2       |           |  |   | 3            | 
|Sustaining EE&D costs                                         |  |         | 1,480   |  |         |   | 1,000   |           |  |   | 31           | 
|Sustaining capitalized mine development
    and capital costs |  |         | 895     |  |         |   | 408     |           |  |   | 1,041        | 
|                                                              |  | $       | 3,915   |  |         | $ | 3,698   |           |  | $ | 2,384        | 
|Impact of change in functional currency2                      |  |         | -       |  |         |   | (15     | )         |  |   | -            | 
|All-in sustaining costs                                       |  | $       | 3,915   |  |         | $ | 3,683   |           |  | $ | 2,384        | 
|Payable silver ounces sold                                    |  |         | 359,947 |  |         |   | 349,661 |           |  |   | 128,481      | 
|AISC                                                          |  | $       | 10.88   |  |         | $ | 10.53   |           |  | $ | 18.56        | 










| | 1 | Cash
                                         operating costs, net of by-product revenue, are reconciled to the Company’s financial
                                         statements in the cash cost table.
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | The change
                                         in functional currency was accounted for on a prospective basis, with prior period comparative
                                         information translated to the USD at the foreign exchange rates on July 1, 2016. The
                                         July 1, 2016 exchange rates differ from the historical exchange rates used to calculate
                                         the previously-disclosed cost per tonne milled, cash cost and AISC metrics, requiring
                                         an adjustment in the reconciliation for the prior-period comparatives.
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 42







|(000’s, unless otherwise noted)                               |  | GMC     |           |   | Topia   |   |           | Corporate |  |   | Consolidated |  
|------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------- | --------- | - | ------- | - | --------- | --------- |  | - | ------------ | -
|                                                              |  | FY 2016 |           |   | FY 2015 |   |           | FY 2016   |  |   | FY 2015      |  
|Cash operating costs, net of by-product revenue1              |  | $       | 1,257     |   |         | $ | 9,600     |           |  | $ | 6,088        |  
|G&A costs                                                     |  |         | -         |   |         |   | -         |           |  |   | -            |  
|Share-based compensation                                      |  |         | -         |   |         |   | -         |           |  |   | -            |  
|Accretion                                                     |  |         | 8         |   |         |   | 20        |           |  |   | 12           |  
|Sustaining EE&D costs                                         |  |         | 3,590     |   |         |   | 2,539     |           |  |   | 222          |  
|Sustaining capitalized mine development
    and capital costs |  |         | 2,843     |   |         |   | 4,200     |           |  |   | 1,835        |  
|                                                              |  | $       | 7,698     |   |         | $ | 16,359    |           |  | $ | 8,157        |  
|Impact of change in functional currency2                      |  |         | (10       | ) |         |   | 157       |           |  |   | (5           | )
|All-in sustaining costs                                       |  | $       | 7,688     |   |         | $ | 16,516    |           |  | $ | 8,152        |  
|Payable silver ounces sold                                    |  |         | 1,477,695 |   |         |   | 1,663,893 |           |  |   | 532,557      |  
|AISC                                                          |  | $       | 5,.20     |   |         | $ | 9.93      |           |  | $ | 15.31        |  



The above costs are included in the Company’s condensed
interim consolidated financial statements as follows:



|Item                                                      |  | Source                                                                                                                                   
|--------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|G&A costs                                                 |  | Consolidated statements of comprehensive income                                                                                          
|Share-based compensation                                  |  | Consolidated statements of comprehensive income                                                                                          
|Accretion                                                 |  | Included in Finance and other income within the consolidated
    statements of comprehensive income                                      
|Sustaining EE&D costs                                     |  | A subset of the total exploration and evaluation, and development
    expenses within the consolidated statements of comprehensive income
|Sustaining capitalized mine development and capital costs |  | Included within mineral properties, plant and equipment additions
    on the statement of financial position                             



Management believes that the AISC measure
represents the total sustainable costs of producing silver from current operations, and provides additional information of the
Company’s operational performance and ability to generate cash flows.



In the above tables, any expenses incurred
in respect of El Horcón, Santa Rosa, the GDLR Project and the CMC were considered non-sustaining.



AISC per Ag eq oz



AISC per Ag eq oz starts with operating
cash cost and adds G&A expenditures inclusive of share-based compensation, accretion of reclamation provision, sustaining
exploration and evaluation expenses, sustaining mine development costs and sustaining capital expenditures. The Company believes
that the disclosure of this measure provides a broader measure of the cost of all metal production at its operations, as measured
by silver equivalent ounces, as the cost metric includes sustaining capital and EE&D expenditures, G&A costs, and other
costs not commonly included in the cost of production and therefore not included in cash cost per Ag eq oz.








| | 1 | Cash
                                         operating costs are reconciled to the Company’s financial statements in the cash
                                         cost table.
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | The change
                                         in functional currency was accounted for on a prospective basis, with prior period comparative
                                         information translated to the USD at the foreign exchange rates on July 1, 2016. The
                                         July 1, 2016 exchange rates differ from the historical exchange rates used to calculate
                                         the previously-disclosed cost per tonne milled, cash cost and AISC metrics, requiring
                                         an adjustment in the reconciliation for the prior-period comparatives.
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 43







|(000’s, unless otherwise noted)                               |  | GMC     |         |  | Topia   |   |         | Corporate |  |   | Consolidated | 
|------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------- | ------- |  | ------- | - | ------- | --------- |  | - | ------------ | 
|                                                              |  | Q4 2016 |         |  | Q4 2015 |   |         | Q4 2016   |  |   | Q4 2015      | 
|Cash operating costs1                                         |  | $       | 6,511   |  |         | $ | 7,537   |           |  | $ | 2,745        | 
|G&A costs inclusive of SBC                                    |  |         | -       |  |         |   | -       |           |  |   | -            | 
|Share-based compensation                                      |  |         | -       |  |         |   | -       |           |  |   | -            | 
|Accretion                                                     |  |         | 2       |  |         |   | 2       |           |  |   | 3            | 
|Sustaining EE&D costs                                         |  |         | 1,480   |  |         |   | 1,000   |           |  |   | 31           | 
|Sustaining capitalized mine development and capital
    costs |  |         | 895     |  |         |   | 408     |           |  |   | 1,041        | 
|                                                              |  | $       | 8,888   |  |         | $ | 8,947   |           |  | $ | 3,820        | 
|Impact of change in functional currency2                      |  |         | -       |  |         |   | (44     | )         |  |   | -            | 
|All-in sustaining costs                                       |  | $       | 8,888   |  |         | $ | 8,903   |           |  | $ | 3,820        | 
|Silver equivalent ounces sold                                 |  |         | 684,864 |  |         |   | 695,071 |           |  |   | 198,484      | 
|AISC per Ag eq oz                                             |  | $       | 12.98   |  |         | $ | 12.81   |           |  | $ | 19.25        | 



|(000’s, unless otherwise noted)                               |  | GMC     |           |   | Topia   |   |           | Corporate |  |   | Consolidated |  
|------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------- | --------- | - | ------- | - | --------- | --------- |  | - | ------------ | -
|                                                              |  | FY 2016 |           |   | FY 2015 |   |           | FY 2016   |  |   | FY 2015      |  
|Cash operating costs1                                         |  | $       | 28,006    |   |         | $ | 31,683    |           |  | $ | 10,735       |  
|G&A costs                                                     |  |         | -         |   |         |   | -         |           |  |   | -            |  
|Share-based compensation                                      |  |         | -         |   |         |   | -         |           |  |   | -            |  
|Accretion                                                     |  |         | 8         |   |         |   | 20        |           |  |   | 12           |  
|Sustaining EE&D costs                                         |  |         | 3,590     |   |         |   | 2,539     |           |  |   | 222          |  
|Sustaining capitalized mine development and capital
    costs |  |         | 2,843     |   |         |   | 4,200     |           |  |   | 1,835        |  
|                                                              |  | $       | 34,447    |   |         | $ | 38,442    |           |  | $ | 12,804       |  
|Impact of change in functional currency2                      |  |         | (10       | ) |         |   | 179       |           |  |   | (5           | )
|All-in sustaining costs                                       |  | $       | 34,437    |   |         | $ | 38,621    |           |  | $ | 12,799       |  
|Silver equivalent ounces sold                                 |  |         | 2,954,567 |   |         |   | 2,966,641 |           |  |   | 788,166      |  
|AISC per Ag eq oz                                             |  | $       | 11.66     |   |         | $ | 13.02     |           |  | $ | 16.24        |  



CAUTIONARY STATEMENT ON FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS



Certain of the statements and information
in this document constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the United States Private Securities
Litigation Reform Actof 1995 and “forward-looking information” within Canadian securities laws (collectively,
“forward-looking statements”). All statements, other than statements of historical fact, addressing activities, events
or developments that the Company expects or anticipates will or may occur in the future are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking
statements are often, but not always, identified by the words “anticipates”, “believes”, “expects”,
“may”, “likely”, “plans”, “intends”, “expects”, “may”,
“forecast”, “project”, “budgets”, “potential”, and “outlook”, or similar
words, or statements that certain events or conditions “may”, “might”, “could”, “can”,
“would”, or “will” occur. Forward-looking statements reflect the Company’s current expectations
and assumptions, and are subject to a number of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may cause the
Company’s actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any anticipated future results, performance
or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.










| | 1 | Cash
                                         operating costs are reconciled to the Company’s financial statements in the cash
                                         cost per Ag eq oz table.
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | The
                                         change in functional currency was accounted for on a prospective basis, with prior period
                                         comparative information translated to the USD at the foreign exchange rates on July 1,
                                         2016. The July 1, 2016 exchange rates differ from the historical exchange rates used
                                         to calculate the previously-disclosed cost per tonne milled, cash cost and AISC metrics,
                                         requiring an adjustment in the reconciliation for the prior-period comparatives.
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 44







In particular, this MD&A includes
forward-looking statements, principally under the section titled Outlook, but also elsewhere in this document relating
to estimates, forecasts, and statements as to management’s expectations, opinions and assumptions with respect to the future
production of silver, gold, lead and zinc; profit, operating costs and cash flows; grade improvements; sales volume and selling
prices of products; capital and exploration expenditures, plans, timing, progress, and expectations for the development of the
Company’s mines and projects; the timing of production and the cash and total costs of production; sensitivity of earnings
to changes in commodity prices and exchange rates; the impact of foreign currency exchange rates; expenditures to increase or
determine reserves and resources; sufficiency of available capital resources; title to claims; expansion and acquisition plans;
and the future plans and expectations for the Company’s properties and operations. Examples of specific information in this
MD&A that may constitute forward-looking statements are:



| | · | Expectation
                                         that the acquisition of the CMC will close during the first quarter of 2017;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Expectations
                                         of the Company’s silver equivalent ounce production for 2017;
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Plans
                                         to undertake approximately 39,500 metres of exploration drilling in 2017 to further define
                                         resources, look for vein extensions and test new targets;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Anticipated
                                         use of the net proceeds from the Company’s equity financings to fund operating,
                                         development and exploration expenditures at the Company’s mining operations and
                                         projects, for possible future acquisitions and for general corporate and working capital
                                         purposes;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | There
                                         are no foreseeable financing requirements under the short form base shelf prospectus;
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Expectations
                                         that the Company can complete the design and construction of the Topia tailings storage
                                         facility Phase II expansion and restart the Topia plant prior to the end of the first
                                         quarter of 2017;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | The
                                         compilation and submission of technical information by CONAGUA, and CONAGUA’s review
                                         of such information, is expected to continue to extend at least into the second quarter of 2017;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Expectations
                                         that the current tailings footprint at the GMC can be maintained and will support operations
                                         at the GMC until at least 2020;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Expectations
                                         that permits associated with the use and expansion of the tailings storage facility at
                                         the GMC will be granted in due course, with no suspension of the GMC operations;
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | The
                                         voluntary environmental audit program undertaken by PROFEPA for the Topia Mine is expected
                                         to commence during March 2017 and to last for several months;
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Expectations
                                         that any potential gaps in existing compliance associated with the ongoing environmental
                                         review of Topia’s operations will be capable of being addressed though a mitigation
                                         plan;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Guidance
                                         for cash cost and AISC for 2017;
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Guidance
                                         for capital expenditures and EE&D expenses for 2017 and beyond for each of the Company’s
                                         operating mines and projects;
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Expectations
                                         that cash flows from operations along with current net working capital will be sufficient
                                         to fund capital investment and development programs for 2017 and the foreseeable future;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Expectations
                                         regarding access to additional capital in order to fund additional expansion or development
                                         plans, or to undertake an acquisition;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | Expectations
                                         in respect of permitting and development activities; and
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | · | The
                                         Company’s objective to acquire additional mines or projects in the Americas.
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 45







These forward-looking statements are necessarily
based on a number of factors and assumptions that, while considered reasonable by the Company as of the date of such statements,
are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies, as described below.
These assumptions made by the Company in preparing the forward looking information contained in this MD&A, which may prove
to be incorrect, include, but are not limited to, general business and economic conditions; the supply and demand for, deliveries
of, and the level and volatility of prices of, silver, gold, lead and zinc; expected CAD, MXN and USD exchange rates; the timing
of the receipt of regulatory and governmental approvals for development projects and other operations; costs of production, and
production and productivity levels; estimated future capital expenditures and cash flows; the continuing availability of water
and power resources for operations; the accuracy of the interpretation and assumptions used in calculating reserve and resource
estimates (including with respect to size, grade and recoverability); the accuracy of the information included or implied in the
various independently produced and published technical reports; the geological, operational and price assumptions on which these
technical reports are based; conditions in the financial markets; the ability to attract and retain skilled staff; the ability
to procure equipment and operating supplies and that there are no material unanticipated variations in the cost of energy or supplies;
the ability to secure contracts for the sale of the Company’s products (metals concentrates); the execution and outcome
of current or future exploration activities; that current financial resources will be sufficient for planned activities and to
complete further exploration programs; the possibility of project delays and cost overruns, or unanticipated excessive operating
costs and expenses; the Company’s ability to maintain adequate internal control over financial reporting, and disclosure
controls and procedures; the ability of contractors to perform their contractual obligations; operations not being disrupted by
issues such as mechanical failures, labour or social disturbances, illegal occupations and adverse weather conditions; that financial
resources will be sufficient to fund new acquisitions, if any.



This list is not exhaustive of the factors
that may affect any of the Company’s forward-looking statements or information. Forward-looking statements or information
are statements about the future and are inherently uncertain, and actual achievements of the Company or other future events or
conditions may differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking statements or information due to a variety of risks,
uncertainties and other factors, including, without limitation, changes in commodity prices; changes in foreign currency exchange
rates; acts of foreign governments; political risk and social unrest; uncertainties related to title to the Company’s mineral
properties and the surface rights thereon, including the Company’s ability to acquire, or economically acquire, the surface
rights to certain of the Company’s exploration and development projects; unanticipated operational difficulties due to adverse
weather conditions; failure of plant or mine equipment and unanticipated events related to health, safety, and environmental matters;
failure of counterparties to perform their contractual obligations; delays in obtaining necessary permits for extension of operations;
inability to maintain or obtain permits for operations; inability to restart the Topia plant; inability to complete the Coricancha
acquisition; deterioration of general economic conditions, and other risks described herein or in the Company’s most recent
Form 40-F/AIF.



The Company’s forward-looking statements
and information are based on the assumptions, beliefs, expectations and opinions of management as of the date of this MD&A.
The Company will update forward-looking statements and information if and when, and to the extent required by applicable securities
laws. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements contained herein are
expressly qualified by this cautionary statement.



Further information can be found in the
section entitled Description of the Business – Risk Factors in the most recent Form 40-F/AIF on file with the SEC
and Canadian provincial securities regulatory authorities. Readers are advised to carefully review and consider the risk factors
identified in the Form 40-F/AIF for a discussion of the factors that could cause the Company’s actual results, performance
and achievements to be materially different from any anticipated future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied
by the forward-looking statements. It is recommended that prospective investors consult the more complete discussion of the Company’s
business, financial condition and prospects that is included in the Form 40-F/AIF.



CAUTIONARY NOTE TO US INVESTORS



This MD&A
has been prepared in accordance with Canada securities regulations, which differs from the securities regulations of the United
States. The terms “Mineral Resource”, “Measured Mineral Resource”, “Indicated Mineral Resource”
and “Inferred Mineral Resource” are used in accordance with Canadian NI 43-101, however, these terms are not defined
terms under SEC Industry Guide 7 and are normally not permitted to be used in reports and registration statements filed with the
SEC. Investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of the mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted
into reserves. “Inferred Mineral Resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and great uncertainty
as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an Inferred Mineral Resource will ever
be upgraded to a higher category. In accordance with Canadian rules, estimates of Inferred Mineral Resources cannot form the basis
of feasibility or other advanced economic studies. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an Inferred Mineral
Resource exists or is economically or legally mineable.



GREAT PANTHER SILVER LIMITEDManagement’s Discussion & AnalysisPage 46