processes in the budget execution sphere (see Section 5). In this section, we focus on analytical tools to assess the operational efficiency of security sector spending.

Analysis in other sectors typically proceeds with the measurement of unit costs, outcome (or output or effectiveness) indicators, and rates of return (cost / benefit analysis could be used to guide allocations especially within sectors—see World Bank, 2005, Volume 1, Chapter 5—although such analysis has limitations). In theory, the security sector should be subjected to the same discipline. Examples include:

- For defense, preparedness indicators (although more akin to output indicators rather than to outcomes) are a highly appropriate performance indicator in peacetime.

- For the police, and for the internal security system more generally, the ultimate outcome of local security and rule of law is difficult to measure, especially in Afghanistan where crime statistics are virtually non-existent.  Information from surveys on the numbers and types of crime encountered by households could be useful, however.  The availability and readiness of police staff, including female police officers and separate detention facilities for women, can be useful indicators, in the case of women officers mitigating the risks women face during detention.

- The performance of the justice system can be measured by various indicators like numbers of cases handled, timeliness of processing court cases, and households’ perceptions of the justice system and their indications of willingness (or otherwise) to use formal justice channels when seeking redress.

- In the case of mine action, outcomes of mine clearance activities (land and areas free of landmines—with clear linkage to ultimate development benefits) can be specified and measured reasonably well, and compared with the costs of mine clearance.

- For counter-narcotics, the appropriate outcome indicator at the national level is progressive reduction over time and eventual elimination of the opium economy. However, measuring the performance of counter-narcotics activities is difficult, and linking such performance to progress toward achieving the strategic objective of reducing opium production and trade is even more difficult.  Given the variety of activities encompassed under the counter-narcotics rubric, performance indicators for the different components need to be differentiated appropriately.  For example, indicators of rural development and agricultural progress can measure the ability of the rural economy to reduce dependence on illicit narcotics production over the longer term.

- More generally, in all parts of the security sector some basic indicators of inputs can be useful in measuring performance, for example number and ratio of staff on the job (confirmed by spot-inspections), percentage of staff in security services properly equipped, proportion of staff who have received training, percentage of budget resources spent, etc.  Expenditure tracking surveys can be a useful tool in this regard.

- Unit costs, although not an outcome indicator, can be useful performance indicators of the efficiency with which inputs for service delivery are being provided.

Nevertheless, it must be recognized that this approach has limitations in the security sector, for two main reasons. First, in many cases the objective is to save human lives. Although not insurmountable—the concept of Disability Adjusted Life Year, which provides a common measure for comparing the burden of disease taking into account both death and disability arising from illness, is used in the health sector—measuring the cost of a life is 15