Mr. Bruno Imbert, Hoda Selim, Ms. Gwenaelle Suc, and Qing Zhao
This paper takes stock of unorthodox expenditure procedures in CEMAC and WAEMU countries and assesses their potential fiscal impact. “Unorthodox procedures” are defined as spending practices that bypass legal provisions governing public expenditure processes and circumvent regular controls or other budgetary rules, including those related to budget time limits, approved ceilings, or approved appropriations. The paper shows that despite PFM reforms, recourse to such procedures has persisted—resulting in the accumulation of arrears; inadequate fiscal reporting, including large stock-flow adjustments; and corruption vulnerabilities.
This paper assesses the advantages and disadvantages of the French and British public expenditure management systems as used in Africa. The main differences are in budget execution and government accounting. In both francophone and anglophone Africa, there are common weaknesses in the application of the inherited systems, which appear to dominate any distinct features of the individual systems. Desirable reforms in both systems will only be successful if they are accompanied by measures that enhance the accountability of those who operate the systems, including enforcing the rules embodied in existing or reformed regulatory frameworks.