Georgia

Which countries lead in budget accountability? Which ones need improvement? Explore our data and recommendations for each of the 125 countries assessed.
Open Budget Survey Results

Public Participation

44

Budget Oversight

83

Transparency

87

Open Budget Survey 2023

Government budget decisions – what taxes to levy, what services to provide, and how much debt to take on – have important consequences for all people in society. When governments provide information and meaningful channels for the public to engage in these decisions, we can better ensure public money is spent on public interests.

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 legislatures and national audit offices, 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 9th edition of the OBS covers 125 countries.

Summary
Country Specific Assessments
Country summary EN
pdf, 237.57 KB
Questionnaire EN
pdf, 996.71 KB
87 /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 Georgia compared to others

Global Average
45
Georgia
87
Azerbaijan
67
Russia
66
Türkiye
64
Kazakhstan
63
Kyrgyz Republic
61
Tajikistan
33
0
Insufficient
61
Sufficient
100

Georgia’s ranking: 1 of 125 countries

0
100

How has the transparency score for Georgia changed over time?

55
2012
66
2015
82
2017
81
2019
87
2021
87
2023
0
Insufficient
61
Sufficient
100

Public availability of budget documents in Georgia

Key
Available to the Public
Published Late, or Not Published Online, or Produced for Internal Use Only
Not Produced
Scroll
Document 2012 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
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 Georgia 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. 2023 100
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. 2023 87
Enacted Budget The budget that has been approved by the legislature. 2023 100
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. 2023 58
In-Year Reports Include information on actual revenues collected, actual expenditures made, and debt incurred at different intervals; issued quarterly or monthly. 2022 100
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. 2022 74
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. 2021 85
Audit Report Issued by the supreme audit institution, this document examines the soundness and completeness of the government's year-end accounts. 2021 95

Georgia’s transparency score of 87 in the OBS 2023 is largely the same as its score in 2021.

Recommendations

Georgia should prioritize the following actions to improve budget transparency:

Seek public input on the contents of the Citizens Budget, and disseminate the Citizens Budget through different types of media to reach a variety of audiences.
Include additional information on fiscal risk in the Executive's Budget Proposal, for example on transfers to public corporations and quasi-fiscal activities.
44 /100

The OBS 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.

Georgia has a public participation score of 44 (out of 100).

Public participation in Georgia compared to others

Global Average
15
Georgia
44
Kyrgyz Republic
35
Russia
33
Azerbaijan
11
Kazakhstan
11
Tajikistan
7
Türkiye
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

47
/100
Formulation
(executive)
78
/100
Approval
(legislature)
0
/100
Implementation
(executive)
78
/100
Audit
(supreme audit institution)
Key
0-40: Few
41-60: Limited
61-100: Adequate

Recommendations

Georgia's Ministry of Finance has established pre-budget submissions during budget formulation but, to further strengthen public participation in the budget process, should also prioritize the following actions:

Pilot mechanisms to monitor budget implementation.
Actively engage with vulnerable and underrepresented communities, directly or through civil society organizations representing them, to ensure the participation of civil society organizations in every step of the budgeting process.
83 /100

The OBS 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 Georgia, together, provide adequate oversight during the budget process, with a composite oversight score of 83 (out of 100). Taken individually, the extent of each institution’s oversight is shown below:

Legislative oversight

0
78
100
adequate

Audit oversight

0
95
100
adequate
Key
0-40: Few
41-60: Limited
61-100: Adequate

Recommendations

Georgia's Parliament provides adequate oversight during the planning stage of the budget cycle and adequate oversight during the implementation stage. To further improve oversight, the following actions should be prioritized:

Parliament should have the authority in law to amend the Executive's Budget Proposal.

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

The emerging practice of establishing independent fiscal institutions

Georgia’s independent fiscal institution (IFI) is the Parliamentary Budget Office. Its independence is set in law, and it reports to the legislature. It publishes its own macroeconomic and fiscal forecasts and its own cost estimates of all new policy proposals.

The indicators on IFIs are not scored in the Open Budget Survey.

Methodology

Only documents published and events, activities, or developments that took place through 31 December 2022 were assessed in the OBS 2023.
 
The survey is based on a questionnaire completed in each country by an independent budget expert:
Besik Namchavadze
Transparency International - Georgia
Tbilisi, Georgia 61 Agmashenebeli Ave., 0102
Tel:+995 322 921403; [email protected]
To further strengthen the research, each country’s draft questionnaire is also reviewed by an anonymous independent expert, and in Georgia by a representative of the Ministry of Finance.
Past reports
Years
Language
Country summary EN
PDF, en
Questionnaire EN
PDF, en
Country summary KA
PDF, ka
Country summary EN
PDF, en
Questionnaire EN
PDF, en
Country summary RU
PDF, ru
Questionnaire EN
PDF, EN
Country summary EN
PDF, EN
Questionnaire EN
PDF, EN
Country summary EN
PDF, EN
Country summary RU
PDF, RU
Questionnaire EN
PDF, EN
Country summary EN
PDF, EN
Country summary RU
PDF, RU
Country summary RU
PDF, RU
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