- **_2.2 The effects of transparency for enhanced budgets and more efficient spending_**

**Increasing access to budget information can also enhance the resources available and improve their allocation for more efficient spending** . The experience of the Republic of Korea has been that enhancing budget transparency has “facilitated the use of information by various stakeholders” so that civil society organizations can influence budgetary priorities and National Assembly members could upgrade policy debates among other benefits (You and Lee 2011, pp.30-33). Robinson emphasized the importance of transparency from the perspective of equity and social justice, where secrecy “can result in priorities that are biased towards elite interests and not tailored to the needs and priorities of the poor.” The case studies he reviewed signaled a connection between budget transparency and increased allocations for social welfare expenditure priorities, especially for reproductive health in Mexico, child support grants in South Africa, and tribal development expenditures in Gujarat (pp.12-20).

**Improving the tracking of aid allocation and expenditures can contribute to better resource management in aid delivery** . By analyzing data from 70 countries collected via a country-level survey on mutual accountability and transparency, Martin (2010) concluded that strengthening transparency resulting from the better tracking of aid information contributed to the better prioritization of spending needs for a pro-poor orientation and overall improvements in budgeting and spending related to aid delivery. Key factors reflecting improvements in transparency included the breadth of information available (i.e., to include projected future disbursements, compliance with national and international aid effectiveness targets, etc.) and the timeliness and consistency of information available from a range of sources.

# **Indicators**

Reviews and studies to date have focused largely on qualitative data from case studies where the results logic is understood within a unique context. However, the analyses do demonstrate the types of indicators that can be used to measure needed _changes in transparency_ that _contribute to enhanced budgets and more efficient spending,_ such as in the following examples.

- Use of a national mutual accountability and aid transparency survey (Martin 2006) to collect multi-stakeholder input from each country to assess the presence and quality of mechanisms for ensuring transparency, such as:

- The existence of a national aid policy document defining the government’s priorities on aid with formal provider targets

- The use of forums in which providers and recipients discuss development results and aid issues

- The inclusion of budget analyses from independent monitoring groups, parliaments, and civil society organizations

- Use of Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys to identify budget leakages and publicize them for enhancing budget allocations to pro-poor priorities (Joshi 2010)

- Level of inadequacy of existing allocations and discrepancies between commitments and actual disbursements based on independent budget analysis (Robinson 2006)

6