Country Results  | View this page in:

North Macedonia

Which countries lead in budget accountability? Which ones need improvement? Explore our data and recommendations for each of the 120 countries assessed.
Open Budget Survey Results

Public Participation

0

Budget Oversight

54

Transparency

41

Open Budget Survey 2019

Government budget decisions – what taxes to levy, what services to provide, and how much debt to take on – affect how equal a society is and the well-being of its people, including whether the most disadvantaged will have real opportunities for a better life. It is critical that governments inform and engage the public on these vital decisions that impact their lives.

Read more

 

The Open Budget Survey (OBS) is the world’s only independent, comparative and fact-based research instrument that uses internationally accepted criteria to assess public access to central government budget information; formal opportunities for the public to participate in the national budget process; and the role of budget oversight institutions such as the legislature and auditor in the budget process.

The survey helps local civil society assess and confer with their government on the reporting and use of public funds. This 7th edition of the OBS covers 117 countries.

Summary
Country Specific Assessments
Country summary EN
pdf, 228.14 KB
Questionnaire EN
pdf, 1002.45 KB
41 /100

This part of the OBS measures public access to information on how the central government raises and spends public resources. It assesses the online availability, timeliness, and comprehensiveness of eight key budget documents using 109 equally weighted indicators and scores each country on a scale of 0 to 100. A transparency score of 61 or above indicates a country is likely publishing enough material to support informed public debate on the budget.

Transparency in Macedonia compared to others

Global Average
45
Bulgaria
71
Croatia
68
Slovenia
68
Albania
55
North Macedonia
41
Serbia
40
Bosnia and Herzegovina
33
0
Insufficient
61
Sufficient
100

Macedonia’s ranking: 67 of 117 countries

0
100

How has the transparency score for Macedonia changed over time?

49
2010
35
2012
35
2015
37
2017
41
2019
0
Insufficient
61
Sufficient
100

Public availability of budget documents in Macedonia

Key
Available to the Public
Published Late, or Not Published Online, or Produced for Internal Use Only
Not Produced
Scroll
Document 2010 2012 2015 2017 2019
Pre-Budget Statement
Executive’s Budget Proposal
Enacted Budget
Citizens Budget
In-Year Reports
Mid-Year Review
Year-End Report
Audit Report

How comprehensive is the content of the key budget documents that Macedonia makes available to the public?

Key
61-100 / 100
41-60 / 100
1-40 / 100
Scroll
Key budget document Document purpose and contents Fiscal year assessed Document content score
Pre-Budget Statement Discloses the broad parameters of fiscal policies in advance of the Executive's Budget Proposal; outlines the government's economic forecast, anticipated revenue, expenditures, and debt. 2019 72
Executive’s Budget Proposal Submitted by the executive to the legislature for approval; details the sources of revenue, the allocations to ministries, proposed policy changes, and other information important for understanding the country's fiscal situation. 2019 32
Enacted Budget The budget that has been approved by the legislature. 2019 89
Citizens Budget A simpler and less technical version of the government's Executive’s Budget Proposal or the Enacted Budget, designed to convey key information to the public. 2019 42
In-Year Reports Include information on actual revenues collected, actual expenditures made, and debt incurred at different intervals; issued quarterly or monthly. 2018 44
Mid-Year Review A comprehensive update on the implementation of the budget as of the middle of the fiscal year; includes a review of economic assumptions and an updated forecast of budget outcomes. 2018 Not Produced
Year-End Report Describes the situation of the government's accounts at the end of the fiscal year and, ideally, an evaluation of the progress made toward achieving the budget's policy goals. 2017 55
Audit Report Issued by the supreme audit institution, this document examines the soundness and completeness of the government's year-end accounts. 2017 62

Macedonia’s transparency score of 41 in the OBS 2019 is near its score in 2017.

What changed in OBS 2019?

Macedonia has increased the availability of budget information by:

Publishing the Citizens Budget online.
Publishing the Pre-Budget Statement online in a timely manner.

Recommendations

Macedonia should prioritize the following actions to improve budget transparency:

Produce and publish the Mid-Year Review online in a timely manner.
Include additional policy and fiscal risk information in the Executive's Budget Proposal.
Include additional policy and fiscal risk information in the Year-End Report.
Improve the comprehensiveness of the Citizens Budget (CB) by: including information on the main policy initiatives in the budget, as well as contact information for follow-up by citizens; establishing mechanisms to identify the public’s requirements for budget information in the CB; and publishing CBs for additional stages of the budget process.
Improve the comprehensiveness of the In-Year Reports by: providing information on actual expenditures for individual programs, providing expenditure and revenue comparisons to either the Enacted Budget or the same period in the previous year, and displaying additional information on the composition of total actual debt outstanding.
0 /100

Transparency alone is insufficient for improving governance. Inclusive public participation is crucial for realizing the positive outcomes associated with greater budget transparency.

The OBS also assesses the formal opportunities offered to the public for meaningful participation in the different stages of the budget process. It examines the practices of the central government’s executive, the legislature, and the supreme audit institution (SAI) using 18 equally weighted indicators, aligned with the Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency’s Principles of Public Participation in Fiscal Policies , and scores each country on a scale from 0 to 100.

Macedonia has a public participation score of 0 (out of 100).

Public participation in Macedonia compared to others

Global Average
14
Bulgaria
26
Croatia
22
Slovenia
11
Albania
7
Bosnia and Herzegovina
7
Serbia
2
North Macedonia
0
0
Insufficient
61
Sufficient
100

For more information, see here for innovative public participation practices around the world.

Extent of opportunities for public participation in the budget process

0
/100
Formulation
(executive)
0
/100
Approval
(legislature)
0
/100
Implementation
(executive)
0
/100
Audit
(supreme audit institution)
Key
0-40: Few
41-60: Limited
61-100: Adequate

Recommendations

To further strengthen public participation in the budget process, Macedonia's Ministry of Finance should prioritize the following actions:

Pilot mechanisms to engage the public during budget formulation and to monitor budget implementation.
Actively engage with vulnerable and underrepresented communities, directly or through civil society organizations representing them.

Macedonia's Assembly should prioritize the following actions:

Allow members of the public or civil society organizations to testify during its hearings on the budget proposal prior to its approval.
Allow members of the public or civil society organizations to testify during its hearings on the Audit Report.

Macedonia's State Audit Office should prioritize the following actions to improve public participation in the budget process:

Establish formal mechanisms for the public to assist in developing its audit program and to contribute to relevant audit investigations.
54 /100

The OBS also examines the role that legislatures and supreme audit institutions (SAIs) play in the budget process and the extent to which they provide oversight; each country is scored on a scale from 0 to 100 based on 18 equally weighted indicators. In addition, the survey collects supplementary information on independent fiscal institutions (see Box).

The legislature and supreme audit institution in Macedonia, together, provide limited oversight during the budget process, with a composite oversight score of 54 (out of 100). Taken individually, the extent of each institution’s oversight is shown below:

Legislative oversight

0
47
100
limited

Audit oversight

0
67
100
adequate
Key
0-40: Few
41-60: Limited
61-100: Adequate

Recommendations

Macedonia's Assembly provides limited oversight during the planning stage of the budget cycle and weak oversight during the implementation stage. To improve oversight, the following actions should be prioritized:

The legislature should debate budget policy before the Executive’s Budget Proposal is tabled and approve recommendations for the upcoming budget.
The Executive’s Budget Proposal should be submitted to legislators at least two months before the start of the budget year.
A legislative committee should examine in-year budget implementation and publish reports with their findings online.
In practice, ensure the legislature is consulted before the executive spends any unanticipated revenue.
A legislative committee should examine the Audit Report and publish a report with their findings online.

To strengthen independence and improve audit oversight by the Macedonia State Audit Office, the following actions are recommended:

Ensure audit processes are reviewed by an independent agency.
Be recognized in the Constitution as an independent body.

The emerging practice of establishing independent fiscal institutions

Macedonia does not have an independent fiscal institution (IFI). IFIs are increasingly recognized as valuable independent and nonpartisan information providers to the Executive and/or Parliament during the budget process.

*These indicators are *not* scored in the Open Budget Survey.

Methodology

  • Only documents published and events, activities, or developments that took place through 31 December 2018 were assessed in the OBS 2019.
     
  • The survey is based on a questionnaire completed in each country by an independent budget expert:
    Marjan Nikolov
    Center for Economic Analyses (CEA)
    Bul. Jane Sandanski 63/3 1000 Skopje, North Macedonia
    [email protected]
  • To further strengthen the research, each country’s draft questionnaire is also reviewed by an anonymous independent expert, and in Macedonia by a representative of the Ministry of Finance.

 

Past reports
Years
Language
Country summary EN
PDF, en
Questionnaire EN
PDF, en
Country summary MK
PDF, mk
Country summary EN
PDF, en
Questionnaire EN
PDF, en
Country summary MK
PDF, mk
Questionnaire EN
PDF, EN
Country summary EN
PDF, EN
Country summary EN
PDF, EN
Questionnaire EN
PDF, EN
Country summary EN
PDF, EN
Country summary EN
PDF, EN
Country summary EN
PDF, EN
Questionnaire EN
PDF, EN
Questionnaire EN
PDF, EN
Country summary EN
PDF, EN
Questionnaire EN
PDF, EN
Country summary EN
PDF, EN