with some development outcomes than the overall OBI did, the researchers explored the impact of some components of budget transparency separately. Specifically, a series of regression analyses explored whether associations between transparency and _human development outcomes_ are significant when the impacts of different income levels and geography are taken into effect. The _regime type_ and _institutional quality indicators_ included:

- Freedom House<sup>1</sup> Civil Rights Index score

- Freedom House Political Rights Index score

- Open Budget Index score

- Legislative strength index, based on subset of OBI questions

- Supreme Audit institution strength index, based on subset of OBI questions

- Citizen participation index, based on subset of OBI questions

- Polity IV Regime Type<sup>2</sup>

# **_2.5 The factors or conditions needed for transparency to have the desired effect_**

**In each case, assessing the quality of transparency or the presence of certain characteristics is required in order to identify associated outcomes.** Numerous studies have suggested that transparency in budgeting does not always matter and does not guarantee progress toward development outcomes. For example, a broad systematic review of econometric and quantitative studies exploring the impact of changes in the transparency of infrastructure procurement and delivery found that increasing transparency did not contribute to the desired outcomes in more than half (53%) of the 862 observations (Annamalai et al 2012). McGee and Gaventa (2010) concluded that it is not yet possible to generalize the effects of factors for articulating a reliable results chain, but their review summarized _two categories of factors that are likely to contribute to the effectiveness of transparency_ in contributing to intermediate and higher-level outcomes:

- _State responsiveness_ (supply) factors— that is, the level of democratization, political will, broader enabling legal frameworks, political incentives, and sanctions.

- _Citizen voice_ (demand) factors—such as the opportunities for citizens and CSOs to use budget information and participate in budgeting processes, and the degree to which transparency and accountability initiatives interact with other collective action strategies.

**Transparency leads to accountability only under certain conditions.** Fox (2007) highlighted an important distinction between “clear” versus “opaque” transparency, where “clear transparency sheds light on institutional behavior” and “permits interested parties (such as policy makers, opinion makers, and programme participants) to pursue strategies of constructive change” (p.667). Transparency is more likely to produce the intended effects when it fulfills both the condition of “publicity”—having relevant disclosed information actually reach the intended audience—and the condition of “political agency”—having mechanisms where citizens can take action in response to the disclosed information (Peixoto 2013).

> 1 Freedom House is an independent watchdog organization dedicated to the expansion of freedom around the world and collects data on various related issues (among other activities).

> 2 The Polity IV Project continues the Polity research tradition of coding the authority characteristics of states in the world system for purposes of comparative quantitative analysis.

8