Ghana's 10 percent agriculture expenditure saga: Why reported expenditure shares are not what they seem
This note first discusses the differences between the general government sector and the public corporations sector, and then presents the rationale for when to add and separate expenditures in the two sectors in the accounting of government expenditures. It then presents revised estimates for Ghana...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Brief |
| Language: | Inglés |
| Published: |
International Food Policy Research Institute
2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/147085 |
| _version_ | 1855535984024748032 |
|---|---|
| author | Benin, Samuel Tiburcio, Ernesto |
| author_browse | Benin, Samuel Tiburcio, Ernesto |
| author_facet | Benin, Samuel Tiburcio, Ernesto |
| author_sort | Benin, Samuel |
| collection | Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace) |
| description | This note first discusses the differences between the general government sector and the public corporations sector, and then presents the rationale for when to add and separate expenditures in the two sectors in the accounting of government expenditures. It then presents revised estimates for Ghana on the share of GAE in GTE from 2001 to 2015, which exclude expenditures of Cocobod and expenditures on nonagricultural functions from GAE, in accordance with the official AU guidance note.2 The formula for this is given by GAE*100/GTE. It proposes another formula for obtaining parallel estimates if the Cocobod expenditures are included in the calcu-lations, as attempted in the agPER studies. This revised formula adds the expenditures of all of Ghana’s public boards and corporations (PBCs) to GTE in the denominator to make it comparable to adding expenditures of Cocobod to GAE in the numerator. The new formula therefore would be (GAE+PBCAE) *100/(GTE+PBCTE), where PBCAE denotes PBCs’ agriculture expenditure and PBCTE denotes PBCs’ total expenditure. The data used are from the two agPERs (MOFA 2013; 2017) and annual reports on the accounts and statements of the government (CAGD 2018), public boards, corporations, and other statutory institutions (AG 2018), and the Co-cobod (Ghana Cocoa Board 2018). |
| format | Brief |
| id | CGSpace147085 |
| institution | CGIAR Consortium |
| language | Inglés |
| publishDate | 2019 |
| publishDateRange | 2019 |
| publishDateSort | 2019 |
| publisher | International Food Policy Research Institute |
| publisherStr | International Food Policy Research Institute |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | CGSpace1470852025-11-06T07:19:27Z Ghana's 10 percent agriculture expenditure saga: Why reported expenditure shares are not what they seem Benin, Samuel Tiburcio, Ernesto agricultural policies caadp agricultural development government procurement This note first discusses the differences between the general government sector and the public corporations sector, and then presents the rationale for when to add and separate expenditures in the two sectors in the accounting of government expenditures. It then presents revised estimates for Ghana on the share of GAE in GTE from 2001 to 2015, which exclude expenditures of Cocobod and expenditures on nonagricultural functions from GAE, in accordance with the official AU guidance note.2 The formula for this is given by GAE*100/GTE. It proposes another formula for obtaining parallel estimates if the Cocobod expenditures are included in the calcu-lations, as attempted in the agPER studies. This revised formula adds the expenditures of all of Ghana’s public boards and corporations (PBCs) to GTE in the denominator to make it comparable to adding expenditures of Cocobod to GAE in the numerator. The new formula therefore would be (GAE+PBCAE) *100/(GTE+PBCTE), where PBCAE denotes PBCs’ agriculture expenditure and PBCTE denotes PBCs’ total expenditure. The data used are from the two agPERs (MOFA 2013; 2017) and annual reports on the accounts and statements of the government (CAGD 2018), public boards, corporations, and other statutory institutions (AG 2018), and the Co-cobod (Ghana Cocoa Board 2018). 2019-06-25 2024-06-21T09:11:08Z 2024-06-21T09:11:08Z Brief https://hdl.handle.net/10568/147085 en Open Access application/pdf International Food Policy Research Institute Benin, Samuel and Tiburcio, Ernesto. 2019. Ghana's 10 percent agriculture expenditure saga: Why reported expenditure shares are not what they seem. ReSAKSS Issue Note 30. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). https://hdl.handle.net/10568/147085 |
| spellingShingle | agricultural policies caadp agricultural development government procurement Benin, Samuel Tiburcio, Ernesto Ghana's 10 percent agriculture expenditure saga: Why reported expenditure shares are not what they seem |
| title | Ghana's 10 percent agriculture expenditure saga: Why reported expenditure shares are not what they seem |
| title_full | Ghana's 10 percent agriculture expenditure saga: Why reported expenditure shares are not what they seem |
| title_fullStr | Ghana's 10 percent agriculture expenditure saga: Why reported expenditure shares are not what they seem |
| title_full_unstemmed | Ghana's 10 percent agriculture expenditure saga: Why reported expenditure shares are not what they seem |
| title_short | Ghana's 10 percent agriculture expenditure saga: Why reported expenditure shares are not what they seem |
| title_sort | ghana s 10 percent agriculture expenditure saga why reported expenditure shares are not what they seem |
| topic | agricultural policies caadp agricultural development government procurement |
| url | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/147085 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT beninsamuel ghanas10percentagricultureexpendituresagawhyreportedexpendituresharesarenotwhattheyseem AT tiburcioernesto ghanas10percentagricultureexpendituresagawhyreportedexpendituresharesarenotwhattheyseem |