# IL **EDUCATAON IN A MACROECONOMIC CONTEXT**

# A. Linking PERs and Bank-supported Adjustment<sup>Operations</sup>

2.01 Public expenditure reviews are time- and resource-intensive<sup>undertakings that</sup> often form the core of Bank-country dialogue<sup>about public sector priorities. They are also</sup> essential in determining priority areas for Bank<sup>support, both project-based and policy-</sup> based.

2.02 In two-thirds of the 36 countries, a Bank-supported<sup>adjustment program was</sup> under way at the time of the report or within three<sup>years before or after it. The link to the</sup> preparation, implementation, or evaluation of adjustment<sup>operations is explicit in only one-</sup> third of the documents (and in only one single-sector<sup>report, the 1986 Turkey Education</sup> and Training Sector Survey). In another one-third,<sup>the adjustment program is merely the</sup> background for the analysis of general or specific<sup>public spending priorities, often in the</sup> form of a government expenditure or investment<sup>plan. Only one of these is a single-sector</sup> report, the 1985 Nigeria Education Sector Expenditure<sup>Review. The final third (five</sup> multisector and six single-sector reports) are general<sup>analyses of public expenditures that</sup> are not explicitly linked to a reform program<sup>or expenditure plan.</sup> 2.03 Thus, the most common reason for a PER,<sup>although not always stated as such,</sup> is to function as an input into or evaluation of<sup>a Bank-supported adjustment program. The</sup> explicit or implicit justification for a PER is<sup>found in the Bank's priorities for its work in</sup> the country more often than in the country's fiscal<sup>management priorities. Indeed, some</sup> Bank and outside experts have contended<sup>that the justification for a public expenditure plan</sup> is derived from Bank, rather than country,<sup>priorities. These critics often find little</sup> coherence between the public expenditure planning<sup>and management exercise and the</sup> government budget, or between the budget<sup>and actual spending. The public expenditure</sup> review is intended precisely to bring clarity and<sup>predictability to the process, but in many</sup> countries it remains an artificial, externally<sup>imposed device not viewed as useful by the</sup> implementing government. For many multisector PERs,<sup>much of the sector-level data are</sup> not collected in the field but are derived by Bank<sup>staff or consultants working on the</sup> government's budget or plan. Because of<sup>the constraints of the process, the sector analyses</sup> are often macro driven.

# B. Including Education in PERs

2.04 No clear rationale is applied across reports to<sup>justify the inclusion of education</sup> or human resources in the multisector reviews.<sup>Of the 28 multisector PERs, 16 include all</sup> principal economic and social sectors, including<sup>education. Half of these justify the</sup> inclusion of education by stating that social<sup>services are, or should be, a government</sup> priority. In addition, five reports focus on the broader<sup>rubric of human resources. Of</sup> i/World Bank Seminar on Public Expenditure Planning<sup>and Management, April 25, 1990,</sup> SEMA Group Management Consultants.

**6**