went to France. France had difficulty accepting the Banks unprecedented policy of specific certification for the use of every dollar of the loan and the negative pledge clause in the Banks Articles of Agreement. French authorities considered the requirements a derogation of the dignity of [their] country. During the loan negotiations a Bank staff member noted that the requirement for specific designation of the use of all the proceeds meant that every contract for purchase of equipment and materials must be submitted and approved by the staff of the Bank against certified bills of the suppliers. We agree to station a staff member in Paris to facilitate the necessary approvals and the system which we set up has been followed by the Bank. See World Bank (1987) and the Banks online archives at www.worldbank.org.

Fiduciary Risk and Financial

Accountability

Efforts to increase accountability in the context of untied budget support call for appropriate definitions of the interrelated notions of risk and accountability-both to interpret the technical mapping of the instruments reviewed in this study and to underpin its eventual recommendations. Although these terms are widely used, their meaning is not always clearly defined or understood.

The discussion in this section is not meant to suggest that the diagnostic instruments under review are intended only to assess public expenditure and financial accountability systems from the viewpoint of risk and accountability. Indeed, the instruments have much broader objectives, including:

Describing the rules (formal and informal) and operational procedures underpinning public expenditure management systems.

Assessing the strengths and weaknesses of these systems.

Offering recommendations for improving the systems rules and procedures, taking into account a countrys political, legal, and cultural traditions and its capacity-and political willingness-to reform.

Supporting the development and implementation of country assistance and poverty reduction programs.