GOVERNMENT AT A GLANCE 2013 OECD Public Governance and Territorial Development
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
GOVERNMENT AT A GLANCE 2013OECD Public Governance and Territorial Development
Government at a Glance
• Biennial publication: 2009, 2011 & 2013
• 50 indicators covering the entire “production chain” of government activity
• Includes all 34 member countries & partners & observers
• What is new in 2013:– Strategic outcomes
– Quality of services from a citizen perspective
• www.oecd.org/gov/govataglance.htm
Government at a Glance framework (2013)
Inputs• Revenues• Expenditure
s• Public
employment & compensation
Processes• Budgeting• Open
Government
• Public procurement
Outputs • Education• Health• Justice
Outcomes• Rule of law• Fiscal
sustainability
• Trust in govt. Institutions
• Fairness - women
• Service quality
Contextual information: political; legal/administrative; cultural; socio-economic, etc.
Capacity Effectiveness
Efficiency/value for money
1. Provide reliable internationally comparative data on government activities and their results in OECD member countries and beyond ;
2. Evaluate …how pubic management practices evolve over time, how countries’ compare with each other;
3. Promote...dialogue and exchange between countries;
4. Orient...reforms and their implementation;
5. Identify …best practices and innovations that can be shared.
4
Publication objectives
Governance Directorate
Budgeting and Public
ExpendituresRegulatory
Policy
Governance Reviews and Partnerships
Reform of the Public Sec tor
Regional Development
Regional Policies for Sustainable
Development
Sources of data
External sources:
EurostatILOUNWJPIMF
Other OECD Directorates
ECO,STI, STD, EDU, ELS, CTP,
EDU
Methodological principles and production cycle
Accuracy• Data collected from subject-matter experts in OECD Working
Groups; reviewed also by PGC delegates.• Whenever possible, responses verified with other
external/additional sources;Transparency
• All data available to the public for verification/review;• All drafts reviewed by countries prior to publication;• Indicators selected in consensus with countries and Steering
Group;Representativeness
• No “super composites”;• Sensitivity analyses on Conflict of interests and Budget
composites.
Drafting &Publication
Surveys drafted & piloted
Data collection from govt.
officials
Data verifiedby
Working Groups& Committees
Data cleaning by OECD in coll.
with govts.
Core indicators
Re-occurring data for time series analysis
•Public finance & economics
• Conflict of interests• Public employment•Performance in selected
sectors
Periodic indicators
Alternate in editions
•Budget practices & procedures
• Regulatory governance• Open government• HRM practices
Special features
Timely/topical data and issue-areas
• Serving Citizens: Accessibility and quality of public services
• Central Government ICT spending
Typology of indicators
Policy areas covered
Challenges
• Accuracy/reliability of qualitative /perception data;
• Measuring rules vs. “reality” (e.g. practice);
• Often limited to central/federal level of government;
• Comparability– institutional differences across countries;
• Measurement of outputs and outcomes still complicated (education and health sectors most advanced);
Government matters …
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2011 2009% of GDP
General government expenditure as a percentage of GDP (2009 & 2011)
Source: OECD National Accounts Statistics (database). Data for the Other major economies (excluding the Russian Federation) are from the IMF Economic Outlook (April 2013).
At what level of government is the money spent?
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
2001
2011
NZL IRL GBR ISR EST NOR TUR AUS PRT CZE USA ISL GRC SVN HUN LUX SVK KOR SWE AUT MEX POL JPN FRA DNK ITA NLD FIN CAN BEL ESP DEU CHE OECD
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100Central government State government Local government Social security%
Distribution of general government expenditures across levels of government (2001 and 2011)
Source: OECD National Accounts Statistics (database)
Source: OECD National Accounts
What is the money spent on?
Structure of general government expenditures by function (2011)
% of total government expenditure
How are government goods and services produced?
Den
mar
kN
ethe
rland
sFi
nlan
dSw
eden
Icel
and
Fran
ceIs
rael
Belg
ium
Cana
da
Uni
ted
King
dom
Nor
way
Slov
enia
New
Zea
land
Hun
gary
Czec
h Re
publ
icG
reec
eO
ECD
Port
ugal
Ger
man
ySp
ain
Esto
nia
Japa
nIr
elan
d
Uni
ted
Stat
esAu
stra
liaIt
aly
Aust
riaPo
land
Slov
ak R
epub
licLu
xem
bour
gTu
rkey
Kore
aSw
itzer
land
Mex
ico
Chile
Russ
ian
Fede
ratio
n
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Compensation of general government employeesCosts of goods and services used and financed by general government Consumption of fixed capital
% of GDP
Production costs as a percentage of GDP (2011)
Source: OECD National Accounts Statistics (database).
How large is public procurement?
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
% o
f genera
l govern
ment
expendit
ure
s
General government procurement as a share of total general government expenditures (2011)
Source: OECD National Accounts Statistics (database).
Government as a significant employer
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
2011 2001
% o
f the
labo
ur f
orce
Employment in general government as a percentage of the labour force (2001 & 2011)
Sources: International Labour Organization (ILO) LABORSTA (database); OECD Labour Force Statistics (database). Data for Korea were provided by government officials.
At what level of government do people work?
BrazilRussian Federation
South Africa
SwitzerlandGermanyCanada
United StatesJapan
BelgiumSweden
SpainFinland
NetherlandsDenmark
MexicoHungaryNorwayFrance
Czech RepublicEstonia
ItalySloveniaPortugal
LuxembourgIsrael
GreeceNew Zealand
TurkeyIreland
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Central Sub-central Social security
Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), LABORSTA database
Distribution of general government employment across levels of government (2011)
Compensation of employees in central/ federal governments: theoretical framework
Components of the total compensation for the public servants
Source: 2011 OECD Compensation Survey
Working time
correctionEmployers’ social
contributions
Gross wages and salaries
Pay relativities in central government across OECD
Average annual compensation for selected central government positions, OECD average (2011)
Source: Government at a Glance 2013; 2012 OECD Compensation Survey
Average earnings of university graduates Senior manager (D1) Middle manager (D3) Senior professionals Secretaries
OECD
0
50 000
100 000
150 000
200 000
250 000
300 000
162726
8654757535
32278
36129
21240
14431
8286
30990
16917
14463
8505
Wages and salaries
Social contributions
Working time correction
2011 U
SD
PP
P
X 4.7
What are the key outcomes?
• Trust in government• Fairness• Serving citizens • Fiscal sustainability• Efficiency• Effectiveness• Accountability and Transparency
Governments are losing trustSl
ovak
Rep
ublic
Switz
erla
ndIs
rael
Uni
ted
King
dom
Fran
cePo
land
Ger
man
ySw
eden
Icel
and
New
Zea
land
Kore
aIta
lyN
orw
ayTu
rkey
Hun
gary
Uni
ted
Stat
esO
ECD
Den
mar
kJa
pan
Luxe
mbo
urg
Mex
ico
Net
herl
ands
Cze
ch R
epub
licA
ustr
alia
Chi
leA
ustr
iaC
anad
aSp
ain
Esto
nia
Bel
gium
Finl
and
Port
ugal
Slov
enia
Gre
ece
Irel
and
Indo
nesi
aB
razi
l
Rus
sian
Fed
erat
ion
Sout
h A
fric
aIn
dia
Chi
na
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% in 2012 (right axis) Percentage point change 2007-2012 (left axis) %Percentagepoints
Confidence in national government in 2012 and its change since 2007
Source: Gallup World Poll
Trust reflects leadership
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1000
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
36
4244
60
30
13
63
19
63
41
44
15 17
22 35
3940
28 32
75
34
49
NZL67
2830
34
3436
58
81
4446
USA
OECD
R² = 0.892148800854397
Approval of country leadership, %
Correlation between confidence in national government and leadership of the country (2012)
Confidence in national government, %
Source: Gallup World Poll.
Be aware of corruption
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1000
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
33.0
67.0
59.0
46.0
66.0
94.0
15.0
64.0
30.0
54.054.0
92.0
79.0
67.0
60.0
76.0
86.0
64.0
80.0
26.0
63.0
33.0
24.0
25.0
68.0
88.0
71.076.076.0
14.0
23.0
53.0
44.0
USA
OECD
R² = 0.80326024484036
Perception of government corruption, %
Correlation between confidence in national government and perception of government corruption (2012)
Confidence in national government, %
Source: Gallup World Poll.
Government reduces income inequalities
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
After taxes and transfers Before taxes and transfersGini coefficient
Differences in income inequality pre- and post- tax and government transfers (2010)
Source: OECD Income Distribution Database.
Does government reduce gender inequalities in employment?
Share of central government employment by occupation groups filled by women (2010)
Estonia
Slove
nia
Austria
Swed
en
Portuga
l
Norway
Canad
a
Poland
New Ze
aland
Denmark Chile
Australi
a
United Kingd
omIta
ly
Finlan
d
Belgium
Netherl
ands
France
German
y
Switz
erlan
d 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Secretarial Positions Professionals Middle ManagementTop Management
%
Source: OECD 2011 Survey on Gender in Public Employment.
Sweden
FinlandIce
land
Norway
Denmark
Netherlands
BelgiumMexic
oSpain
Germany
New Zealand
Slovenia
Portugal
Switzerla
ndAustr
iaFrance
OECD
Luxembourg
Canada
Australia
Poland
United Kingdom
Czech Republic Italy
GreeceIsr
ael
Estonia
Slovak Republic
United States
KoreaIre
landTurke
yChile
Japan
Hungary0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
2012 2002%%
Women in politics
Source: Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) PARLINE (database), and IDEA Quota Project (database).
Share of women parliamentarians and legislated gender quotas (2012 and 2002)
Serving citizens
The service quality frameworkAccess Responsiveness Reliability Satisfaction
Affordability TimelinessAccuracy / Competence / Customer rights
Reported satisfaction (perception)
Geographic proximity“Match” of service to needs
Tangibles function(facilities, machines, etc.)
Reported confidence / Trust (perception)
Adaptations for those with disabilities
Customer service (courtesy and treatment)
Consistency / Fairness
Adaptations to different cultures (e.g. Languages, etc.).
Integrated services(across delivery channels)
Security (confidentiality, safety)
Access to electronic services(digital divide)
• Availability and quality of data
• In consultation with other Directorates
Serving citizens: Timeliness
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Paper returns e-filed returnsDays
Processing time of personal tax returns where a tax refund is expected (2011)
Source: OECD (2013), Tax Administration 2013: Comparative Information on OECD and other Advanced and Emerging Economies.
Citizens increasingly use the Internet to interact with public authorities
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Interaction with public authorities (last 12 months) Sending filled forms (last 12 months)%
Citizens using the Internet to interact with public authorities by type of activity (2012)
Source: OECD ICT Database, and Eurostat Information Society Statistics (database).
Citizens are satisfied with public services
Source: Gallup World Poll
Confidence and satisfaction across government institutions (2012)
Fiscal sustainabilityJa
pan
Uni
ted
King
dom
Uni
ted
Stat
esGre
ece
Port
ugal
Irel
and
Spai
nFr
ance
Slov
ak R
epub
licIc
elan
dPo
land
Aust
ralia
OEC
DNet
herla
nds
Cana
daFi
nlan
dIs
rael
Slov
enia
Belg
ium
New
Zea
land
Ital
yHun
gary
Czec
h Re
publ
icSw
eden
Luxe
mbo
urg
Aust
riaDen
mar
kEs
toni
aGer
man
yKo
rea
Nor
way
Switz
erla
nd
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14Required change in the underlying primary balance, as a % of potential GDP
Total consolidation requirements between 2012 and 2030 in order to reduce government gross financial liabilities to 60% of GDP
Source: OECD calculations; OECD (2013), “OECD Economic Outlook No. 93”, OECD Economic Outlook: Statistics and Projections (database), May 2013.
Public sector efficiency: example of tax administrations
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
2011 2008%
Cost of collection ratios (administrative costs/net revenue collection) (2008 & 2011)
Source: OECD (2013), Tax Administration 2013: Comparative Information on OECD and other Advanced and Emerging Economies.
Cost effectiveness: why is worthwhile to invest in education?
Net present value
Total Costs
Total Benefits
Net present value
Total Costs
Total Benefits
Terti
ary
educ
atio
n
0 20 000 40 000 60 000 80 000 100 000 120 000 140 000 160 000
37 984
28 010
65 994
104 737
39 489
144 226
In equivalent USD converted using PPPs for GDPSource: OECD, Education at a Glance 2012. See Annex 3 for notes
Public net present value for a male obtaining upper or post-secondary non-tertiary education and tertiary education (2009 or latest available year)
OECD average
Accountability and Transparency
Budgeting practices • Performance
budgeting• Medium term
expenditure framework (MTEF)
• Budget Transparency
• Independent Fiscal Institutions (IFIs)
Open Government • Conflict of
interests• Open data
Performance Budgeting
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Composite index
Use of performance budgeting practices at the central level of government (2011)
Source: OECD 2011 Survey on Performance Budgeting.
Budget Transparency
Belg
ium
Cze
ch R
epub
licD
enm
ark
Fran
ce
Germany
Greece
Hungary
IrelandLuxembourgPolandPortugal
Slovak Republic
SloveniaSpain
Sw
itzerland
Turkey
Un
ited
Kin
gd
om
Unit
ed S
tate
s
Aus
tral
ia
Aus
tria
Can
ada
ChileEsto
niaFinlandJapan
IsraelItaly
Korea
Mexico
NetherlandsNew Zealand
Norw
ayS
weden
Russia
n F
eder-
atio
n
Countries with citizens' bud-gets (16)
Countries with-out citizens' budgets (18)
Source: 2012 OECD Survey on Budgeting Practices and Procedures
Use of citizens budgets in OECD countries (2012)
Use of a medium term perspective in the budget
Nethe
rland
s
Denm
ark
Franc
e
Korea
Sweden
Polan
d
Germ
any
Austria
Switzer
land
Eston
ia
Czech
Rep
ublic
Portu
gal
Unite
d Kin
gdom
Turke
y
New Z
eala
nd
OECD ave
rage
Spain
Canad
a
Greec
eUSA
Finla
nd
Slove
nia
Austral
iaIta
ly
Japa
n
Mex
ico
Norway
Irela
nd
Slova
k Rep
ublic
Chile
Belgi
um
Hunga
ry
Isra
el
Luxem
bour
g0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
Use of a medium term perspective in the budget process (2011)
Source: OECD 2011 Survey on Performance Budgeting
Almost half of OECD countries have Independent Fiscal Institutions (IFI)
Countries with IFI (16) Countries without IFI (17)
Existence of Independent Fiscal Institutions (2013)
Source: OECD (2013 forthcoming), Principles for Independent Fiscal Institutions and Country Notes.
Tools for promoting transparency are unevenly applied
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
HIG
H
LEV
EL
ME
DIU
M
LLE
VE
LLO
W
LEV
EL
Level of disclosure of private interests and public availability of information (2012)
Source: 2012 OECD Survey on Managing Conflict of Interest
Governments are increasingly sharing their data
0
2 000
4 000
6 000
8 000
10 000188 921
9 782
4 385
3 7833 317
2 3231 948
1 338 944 849 694 568 540 486 347 185 119
359
188 921
Number of datasetsNumber of datasets in centralised "one-stop shop" open government data portal (2013)
Source: 2013 OECD Survey on Open Government Data.
Other G@G products
Country fact sheets: • Individual country data in relation to OECD
average• Selection of 22 indicators
Regional Government at a Glance
Latin American Government at a Glance• To be launched in June 2014• 32 indicators: -Public Finance and Economics -Public Employment and Pay - Budgeting Practices and Procedures - Public Procurement
• 2 special features: Non-renewable resources as a source of revenues Sustainable Procurement
Related Documents
![Oecd 2012_education at a Glance, Oecd Indicators [Germany]](https://static.cupdf.com/doc/110x72/577ce4b41a28abf1038ef751/oecd-2012education-at-a-glance-oecd-indicators-germany.jpg)
