Country Results  | View this page in:

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Which countries lead in budget openness and accountability? Which ones need improvement? Explore our data and recommendations for every assessed country.
Previous Years
2019 | 2021 | 2023
Open Budget Survey Results

Transparency

30

Public Participation

7

Oversight

48

View Regional Report

Open Budget Survey 2025

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 10th edition of the OBS covers 82 countries.

Summary
Country Specific Assessments
Country summary EN
pdf, 252.78 KB
Questionnaire EN
pdf, 939.9 KB
30 /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 that a country is publishing a sufficient volume of budget information, and that this information provides meaningful coverage of core fiscal data, enabling the public to understand government budget decisions and supporting informed public debate on fiscal policy.

Transparency in Bosnia and Herzegovina compared to others

Global Average
45
Average - Western Balkans & Türkiye
52
Türkiye
65
Albania
64
Croatia
62
Kosovo
57
Montenegro
54
Serbia
53
North Macedonia
39
Bosnia and Herzegovina
30
0
Insufficient
61
Sufficient
100

How has the transparency score for Bosnia and Herzegovina changed over time?

43
2015
35
2017
33
2019
32
2021
27
2023
30
2025
0
Insufficient
61
Sufficient
100

Public availability of budget documents in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Key
Available to the Public
Published Late, or Not Published Online, or Produced for Internal Use Only
None
Scroll
Document 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025
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 Bosnia and Herzegovina 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. 2024 Published Late
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. 2024 28
Enacted Budget The budget that has been approved by the legislature. 2024 50
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. 2024 50
In-Year Reports Include information on actual revenues collected, actual expenditures made, and debt incurred at different intervals; issued quarterly or monthly. 2024 Published Late
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. 2024 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. 2023 54
Audit Report Issued by the supreme audit institution, this document examines the soundness and completeness of the government's year-end accounts. 2023 78

Bosnia and Herzegovina’s transparency score of 30 in the OBS 2025 is near its score in 2023.

What changed in OBS 2025?

Bosnia and Herzegovina has increased the availability of budget information by:

Publishing the Citizens Budget online in a timely manner.

Recommendations

Bosnia and Herzegovina should prioritize the following actions to improve budget transparency:

Publish the Pre-Budget Statement in a timely manner. That is, at least one month before the Executive’s Budget Proposal is submitted to the legislature for consideration.
Publish the In-Year Reports online in a timely manner, no later than three months after the reporting period ends.
Produce and publish the Mid-Year Review online in a timely manner. This document should assess the state of the economy relative to the initial macroeconomic forecast and update the economic projections for the remainder of the year. The MYR should also provide updated estimates of expenditure, revenue, and debt, reflecting the impact of actual experience to date and revised projections for the full fiscal year.
Include in the Executive's Budget Proposal more comprehensive multi-year projections (including BY+2 estimates) and historical budget information (BY-2 and earlier). Moreover, the document could be further strengthened by disclosing forward-looking expenditure and revenue projections, a long-term fiscal sustainability analysis, policy and performance information, and historical data on expenditures, revenues, and debt.
Include in the Year-End Report more comprehensive policy and performance information and macroeconomic forecast data, by strengthening the disclosure of comparisons between original macroeconomic forecast and actual outcome, comparisons between planned nonfinancial outcomes and actual outcomes, and original level of funds for policies impacting the most impoverished and actual amounts.
Improve the comprehensiveness of the Enacted Budget, by strengthening the disclosure of debt level and servicing detail and program-level expenditure detail and the Citizens Budget, by strengthening the disclosure of citizen versions across the budget cycle and public dissemination and outreach efforts.
7 /100

The OBS assesses the extent to which governments provide formal and meaningful opportunities for public participation across the different stages of the budget process. It examines participation practices used by the central government’s executive (including line ministries), the legislature, and the supreme audit institution (SAI), recognizing that engagement can occur across different institutions. Using 18 equally weighted indicators, the OBS evaluates whether these participation mechanisms are timely, inclusive, transparent, and responsive, in line with the Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency (GIFT) Principles of Public Participation in Fiscal Policies . Each country is scored on a scale from 0 to 100, reflecting the strength of its formal public participation practices across institutions and throughout the budget process.

Bosnia and Herzegovina has a public participation score of 7 (out of 100).

Public participation in Bosnia and Herzegovina compared to others

Global Average
17
Average - Western Balkans & Türkiye
13
Kosovo
32
Montenegro
22
Albania
17
Croatia
17
North Macedonia
9
Bosnia and Herzegovina
7
Serbia
2
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

0
/100
Formulation
(executive)
11
/100
Approval
(legislature)
0
/100
Implementation
(executive)
33
/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, Bosnia and Herzegovina's Ministry of Finance and Treasury should prioritize the following actions:

Pilot mechanisms to actively engage the public during budget formulation and throughout budget implementation. This could include public consultations, participatory workshops, online platforms, and citizen monitoring initiatives. This participation should be structured to ensure diverse perspectives are heard, and clear procedures should be established for the public to engage effectively.
Participation activities should actively engage underrepresented communities, either directly or via civil society organizations representing them, and ensure that participants receive feedback on how their contributions influence decision-making.

Bosnia and Herzegovina's Parliamentary Assembly has established public hearings related to the approval of the annual budget, but should also prioritize the following actions:

Allow any member of the public or any civil society organization to testify during hearings on the budget proposal prior to its approval. Ensure the process incorporates diverse perspectives through a structured opportunity for input, and provide citizens and organizations with sufficient information in advance to enable their contributions to meaningfully shape fiscal priorities and outcomes.
Allow members of the public or civil society organizations to testify during its hearings on the Audit Report.

Bosnia and Herzegovina's Audit Office of the Institutions has established mechanisms for the public to assist in developing its audit program. It should prioritize the following actions to improve public participation in the budget process:

Establish formal mechanisms that allow the public to contribute to relevant audit investigations. This could include channels for submitting information or evidence, as well as structured opportunities for citizens and civil society organizations to provide input on ongoing audits. Clear guidelines should be provided to ensure contributions are considered systematically, and feedback is given to participants on the results of the investigation.
48 /100

The OBS examines the role that legislatures and supreme audit institutions (SAIs) play in overseeing the budget process, including how effectively they scrutinize budget proposals, monitor budget implementation and review government accounts. Using 18 equally weighted indicators, the OBS assesses the strength and independence of these oversight institutions and scores each country on a scale from 0 to 100. In addition, the survey collects supplementary information on the existence and role of independent fiscal institutions (IFIs), which can contribute to informed debate and enhanced oversight of fiscal policy (see box below).

The legislature and supreme audit institution in Bosnia and Herzegovina, together, provide limited oversight during the budget process, with a composite oversight score of 48 (out of 100). Taken individually, the extent of each institution’s oversight is shown below:

Legislative oversight

0
25
100
weak

Audit oversight

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

Recommendations

Bosnia and Herzegovina's Parliamentary Assembly provides weak 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 Executive’s Budget Proposal should be submitted to legislators at least two months before the start of the budget year.
Legislative committees should examine the Executive’s Budget Proposal and publish reports with their analysis online.
The legislature should approve the Executive’s Budget Proposal 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 shifts funds specified in the Enacted Budget between administrative units or spends any unanticipated revenue during the budget year.
A legislative committee should examine the Audit Report and publish a report with their findings online.

The benefit of establishing independent fiscal institutions

Bosnia and Herzegovina does not have an independent fiscal institution (IFI). IFIs are widely 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 2024 were assessed in the OBS 2025.
 
The survey is based on a questionnaire completed in each country by an independent budget expert:
Aleksandra Banović
Fondacija "Centar za zastupanje građanskih interesa" ("Public Interest Advocacy Center")
Branilaca Šipa br. 21; 71 000 Sarajevo / www.cpi.ba
aleksandra.banovic@cpi.ba info@cpi.ba
To further strengthen the research, in Bosnia and Herzegovina the draft questionnaire is reviewed by a representative of the Ministry of Finance and Treasury.
Past reports
Years
Language
Country summary EN
PDF, en
Questionnaire EN
PDF, en
Country summary BS
PDF, bs
Country summary EN
PDF, en
Questionnaire EN
PDF, en
Country summary EN
PDF, en
Questionnaire 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
Questionnaire EN
PDF, EN
Country summary EN
PDF, EN
Questionnaire EN
PDF, EN
Country summary EN
PDF, EN