OECD Public Governance Reviews Supreme Audit Institutions And Good Governance by Perpustakaan_Integriti

OECD Public Governance Reviews Supreme Audit Institutions And Good Governance

FOREWORD – 5

Foreword How can governments better learn from the past, make sound choices in the present, and think strategically about the long-term and the future? How can citizens be more confident that policy decisions are taken with their needs in mind? In a demanding and increasingly complex fiscal and policy environment, it is critical to consider the valueadded of all stakeholders in the Executive, Legislature and civil society, including independent actors like supreme audit institutions (SAIs), when answering these questions. In an era that emphasises “doing more with less”, governments are being held accountable not only for the execution of the public budget, but for the effective, efficient, and economical use of taxpayer’s money. Through their traditional role in external oversight of government accounts, SAIs form a critical link in a country’s accountability chain. Yet, this is not the only avenue through which SAIs can support good governance. There is untapped potential in the evolved role of SAIs to go beyond their traditional oversight role and link their work into policy making and policy decisions. It is through this process that SAIs can provide insight to improve the functioning of processes and programmes, and foresight to aid governments in adapting to future trends and risks. Such evidenced-based contributions to addressing systemic issues can lead to better policy formulation, implementation and evaluation. Leading SAIs from across four continents, including Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Korea, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, South Africa and the United States shared insights on how SAIs make valuable contributions to the policy cycle and good governance. This report provides examples and case-studies of innovative audit approaches that use cross-cutting perspectives to provide oversight, insight and foresight. For instance, SAIs provide insight to reduce duplication, fragmentation and overlap in government, and others assess the preparedness of government to address long-term policy challenges, such as climate and demographic change. SAIs can contribute to a policy delivery chain that withstands the weight of short, medium, and long-term challenges. Insight and foresight activities are often ad-hoc, as this study shows, and SAIs can face both endogenous as well as exogenous factors that can limit such contributions to the policy cycle. This report offers forward-looking recommendations on ways for SAIs to evolve as well as to overcome such limitations, thereby reinforcing a whole-of-government approach to establish better policies for better lives.

Angel Gurría, OECD Secretary-General

OECD Public Governance Reviews Supreme Audit Institutions And Good Governance

Articles inside

References

Notes

in EU agencies

4.7. The SAI of Brazil – audit for national development policy

4.6. The SAI of South Africa – auditing for accountability and inclusivity

4.5. The SAI of the Netherlands – auditing for accountability and inclusivity

4.4. The SAI of Korea – auditing for accountability and inclusivity

4.3. The SAI of Canada – auditing for accountability and inclusivity

systems (iSA-Gov

4.3. SAI activities in assessing policy evaluation and oversight

Taking stock: SAI activities in supporting policy evaluation and oversight

4.1. Key elements of evaluating for results and performance improvement

Notes

References

Chapter 4 Supreme Audit Institutions’ input into policy evaluation and oversight

Government

3.3. The SAI of the Netherlands – assessing financial risk exposure of government

3.2. The SAI of Poland – the annual state budget execution audit

3.1. Level of SAI activity in assessing key elements of policy implementation, by country

3.5. SAI activities in assessing policy implementation

3.4. Key elements in the exercise of internal control and risk management

Taking stock: SAI activities in supporting implementation

Key Function 8: Exercise of internal control and risk management

3.1. Key elements of co-ordinating and communicating

Chapter 3 Supreme Audit Institutions’ input into policy implementation

References

Notes

2.10.The SAI of Portugal – strengthening controls in state owned enterprises

workforce sustainability and population ageing

2.8. The SAI of South Africa – budget and strategic plan review

regulatory reform in Korea

Congress and the Executive

2.5. The SAI of the Netherlands – linking evidence-based decisions with efficiency gains

2.6. Types of assessment of key functions of policy formulation, by 10 surveyed SAIs

2.5. SAI activities in assessing policy formulation

Taking Stock: SAI activities in supporting policy formulation

2.3. Key elements of establishing regulatory policy

Key Function 3: Establishing regulatory policy

Key Function 4: Exercise of internal control and risk management

2.3. Spending reviews: Australia, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom

2.4. Key elements of setting internal control policy and managing risk

2.2. Innovative and joint approaches to policy-making: Peru’s “Edu-Lab”

2.1. The Government of Finland’s OHRA “Steering System Reform Effort”

2.1. Key elements of strategic whole-of-government steering and planning

References

Chapter 2 Supreme Audit Institutions’ input into policy formulation

Notes

Key messages to SAIs: Being aware and prepared

Key Function 1: Strategic whole-of-government steering and planning

The outcome: Considerations for all governance actors

1.2. Select SAI activities across the policy cycle

Chapter 1 Supreme Audit Institutions’ input into the policy cycle

Why is the OECD undertaking this work? Integrating evidence into the policy cycle

Executive summary

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acronyms and Abbreviations

1.1. Key functions of the policy cycle in a strategic and open state

The report’s main findings: SAIs are active in assessing functions of the entire policy cycle

TABLE OF CONTENTS