Enhancing Public Accountability National Performance Indicators and the role of the Board of Audit o - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 20
About This Presentation
Title:

Enhancing Public Accountability National Performance Indicators and the role of the Board of Audit o

Description:

Need to measure varied good living conditions in the provinces ... Creating mobile conditions for people and information. Creating good environment ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:81
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 21
Provided by: dkhi
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Enhancing Public Accountability National Performance Indicators and the role of the Board of Audit o


1
(No Transcript)
2
Enhancing Public Accountability- National
Performance Indicators and the role of the Board
of Audit of Japan Muneharu OtsukaCommissioner
, Board of Audit of Japan
3
  • Overview of Todays Discussion
  • National Performance Indicators from Public
    Accountability Aspects
  • Major Indicators in Japan
  • Audit of National Performance Indicators in Japan
  • Conclusion

4
  • 1. National Performance Indicators from Public
    Accountability Aspects
  • 1-1 Public Accountability
  • The meaning, content, and social systems of
    public accountability have changed
  • Recently public accountability to evaluation of
    policy achievement, performance plays an
    important role

5
  • 1-2 Indicators and Public Accountability
  • Indicators have added its value for public
    accountability
  • Indicators have enabled Government to do fair and
    more effective policy evaluation
  • Indicators have enabled Government to explain the
    results of the policy evaluation to the public
    more concisely
  • In some countries, indicators measure nationwide
    socio-economic progresses, stimulate public
    debate, help Government decide on important
    issues
  • These National Performance Indicators are
    epoch-making for public accountability

6
  • 1-3 Three Key Points in Developing and Using
    National Performance Indicators
  • Making National Performance Indicators logically
    and practically consistent with policies
  • Involvement of the general public and Legislative
    body and transparency in development process of
    Indicators for credibility of Indicators
  • SAIs check and evaluation of National
    Performance Indicators

7
  • 2. Major Indicators in Japan
  • 2-1 Outline
  • Ministries and Agencies in Japan established a
    variety of credible statistical indicators
  • Major nationwide indicators
  • To show living standard of people other
    than economic aspects shown by GDP and to make
    individual indicators concise to the general
    public and policy makers
  • 1974 Social Indicators (SI)
  • 1986 New Social Indicators
    (NSI)
  • 1992 Peoples Life Indicators
    (PLI)

8
(No Transcript)
9
  • Peoples Life Indicators (PLI)
  • Established in 1992
  • Background of 1980s
  • Despite high per capita income, people could not
    sense high living standard, needed more realistic
    indicators
  • Over-population in Tokyo, needed to measure
    varying and good living conditions in provincial
    areas

10
  • PLI Indicators of 8 activities of life, and 4
    value of life

11
  • Life Reform Index (LRI)
  • Established in Feb, 2003
  • Purpose To evaluate the incumbent cabinets
    accomplishment of its Structural Reform Program
    directly influencing peoples living conditions
  • LRI divides into 10 indexes. 10 indexes divide
    into sub-indexes

12
  • Structure of Life Reform Index (LRI)
  • Level 1 Level 2
    Level 3
  • (10 aspects) (points of
    evaluation) (statistical indicators)
  • LRI Creating good Fair and Free
    Number of used
  • living conditions
    competition in house selling

  • housing market and purchasing
  • Creating good
    cases
  • working conditions


  • Creating secure
  • conditions


13
  • Structure of Life Reform Index (LRI)
  • Level 2
    Level 3
  • (aspect) (Points of
    Evaluation) (Statistical Indicators)
  • Creating good living Fair and Free
    Number of used house
  • conditions competition in
    selling and purchasing cases
  • housing
    market
  • Shorter
    Average commuting hours

  • commuting
  • time
  • Better
    house Average floor square

  • purchasing measure of newly purchased

  • conditions house

  • Average annual income

  • versus house purchasing
    cost ratio

14
10 Aspects of Life Reform Index
15
  • 2-2 Challenges facing Japans major nationwide
    Indicators
  • Difficulty to select or set Indicators amid
    changing societal and ethical values among
    Japanese people
  • Considerable gaps between what the indicators
    show and what people feel
  • Long history of indicators for evaluation of
    peoples living standard, but short time for
    evaluating the effect of policy goal achievement
  • Need to strengthen the recent effort to evaluate
    the policy goal achievement and its effects

16
  • 3. Audit of National Performance Indicators in
    Japan
  • 3-1 Present Status
  • No move to establish National Performance
    Indicators
  • Japan Board of Audit has not audited Peoples
    Life Indicators and Life Reform Index
  • (Reason)
  • Audit has mainly focused on financial and
    accounting side of the Government activities
  • Neither of indicators is established based on
    broad consensus among Japanese people, and the
    national indicators are still in development stage

17
  • 3-2 Future Prospect
  • SAIs are responsible for encouraging the
    Government to improve their activities, and
    eventually enhancing peoples living standard.
    And SAIs so far has contributed to that
  • If National Performance Indicators are developed
    in Japan, the Board of Audit, Japan would take
    much interest in the processes of Japanese
    Governments setting the Indicators, and target
    values

18
  • 3-3 Viewpoints of Auditing National Performance
    Indicators
  • (1) Regarding selection of Indicators
  • Does the Government properly create and maintain
    consistency among indicator reflecting countrys
    present socio-economic conditions?
  • Do the indicators accurately measure national
    performance, and produce accurate statistical
    value?
  • Does the Government fairly weigh and balance each
    of the individual indicators in individual area?

19
  • 3-3 Viewpoints of Auditing National Performance
    Indicators
  • (2) Regarding targeted values
  • Are targeted values sufficiently high and
    justifiable, and reflect actual policy goals to
    be achieved?
  • Does the Government fairly measure external
    socio-economic elements which influence indicator
    accomplishment?

20
  • Conclusion
  • SAI should shift priorities in viewpoints of
    audit, audited bodies, audit area, as the
    countrys socio-economic conditions change
  • The SAI audit of National Performance Indicators
    will be sooner of later one of the top priority
    areas
  • Because both Governments who set the indicators
    and SAIs who check them share the common goal
    to achieve higher living standards
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com