Zambia Revenue Authority Professional Performance Amidst Structural Constraints, 1994–2019

Caesar Cheelo, M. Hinfelaar
{"title":"Zambia Revenue Authority Professional Performance Amidst Structural Constraints, 1994–2019","authors":"Caesar Cheelo, M. Hinfelaar","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3716824","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"From an initial survey of public sector experts, the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) was regarded as a relatively high performer among public sector institutions in Zambia. This paper utilizes a political settlements approach to track how the distribution of power within Zambia’s political settlement influenced ZRA’s tax policy and administration from its inception in 1994 to 2019. We find that ZRA’s performance over the reference period was highly uneven. Broadly, 1994-2005 was a formative period for the authority, with relatively low performance. Then, between 2006 and 2015, due in part to strong political will and external support, ZRA achieved and maintained a favorable level of professionalism and specialization, held a clear mandate, and established tax targets and internal organizational reforms. But, throughout, ZRA struggled to overcome structural constraints to revenue generation. Policy stability came out of an era of ‘technocratic consensus’ that emerged in the 2000s. Generally, ideas shared by political rules and leading bureaucrats centered on growth, fiscal prudency and domestic resource mobilization aimed at gaining more autonomy, namely weaning Zambia off donor support and conditionalities. This push was augmented in 2011 by Patriotic Front’s (PF) political commitment to resource nationalism. In contrast, 2015-2019 saw a new political settlement dynamic that affected the role of most economic institutions in Zambia, which exposed ZRA to undue political influence. Ultimately, with a high number of political turnovers amidst the increasingly fractious settlement during the reference period, ZRA experienced episodes of vulnerability to politically motivated institutional reforms and reorganizations at the political expediency of the ruling elite.","PeriodicalId":345692,"journal":{"name":"Political Methods: Experiments & Experimental Design eJournal","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Methods: Experiments & Experimental Design eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3716824","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

From an initial survey of public sector experts, the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) was regarded as a relatively high performer among public sector institutions in Zambia. This paper utilizes a political settlements approach to track how the distribution of power within Zambia’s political settlement influenced ZRA’s tax policy and administration from its inception in 1994 to 2019. We find that ZRA’s performance over the reference period was highly uneven. Broadly, 1994-2005 was a formative period for the authority, with relatively low performance. Then, between 2006 and 2015, due in part to strong political will and external support, ZRA achieved and maintained a favorable level of professionalism and specialization, held a clear mandate, and established tax targets and internal organizational reforms. But, throughout, ZRA struggled to overcome structural constraints to revenue generation. Policy stability came out of an era of ‘technocratic consensus’ that emerged in the 2000s. Generally, ideas shared by political rules and leading bureaucrats centered on growth, fiscal prudency and domestic resource mobilization aimed at gaining more autonomy, namely weaning Zambia off donor support and conditionalities. This push was augmented in 2011 by Patriotic Front’s (PF) political commitment to resource nationalism. In contrast, 2015-2019 saw a new political settlement dynamic that affected the role of most economic institutions in Zambia, which exposed ZRA to undue political influence. Ultimately, with a high number of political turnovers amidst the increasingly fractious settlement during the reference period, ZRA experienced episodes of vulnerability to politically motivated institutional reforms and reorganizations at the political expediency of the ruling elite.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
结构约束下的赞比亚税务局专业绩效,1994-2019
从对公共部门专家的初步调查来看,赞比亚税务局(ZRA)被认为是赞比亚公共部门机构中表现相对较高的机构。本文利用政治解决方法来跟踪赞比亚政治解决方案内的权力分配如何影响ZRA从1994年成立到2019年的税收政策和管理。我们发现ZRA在参考期内的表现极不平衡。总体而言,1994-2005年是权力机构的形成时期,绩效相对较低。然后,在2006年至2015年期间,部分由于强烈的政治意愿和外部支持,ZRA实现并保持了良好的专业性和专业化水平,拥有明确的任务,并建立了税收目标和内部组织改革。但是,自始至终,ZRA都在努力克服创收的结构性限制。政策稳定源于本世纪头十年出现的“技术官僚共识”时代。一般来说,政治规则和主要官僚所共有的想法集中在增长、财政审慎和国内资源动员上,旨在获得更多的自主权,即使赞比亚摆脱捐助者的支持和附加条件。2011年,爱国阵线(PF)对资源民族主义的政治承诺进一步推动了这一进程。相比之下,2015-2019年出现了新的政治解决动态,影响了赞比亚大多数经济机构的作用,使ZRA受到不正当的政治影响。最后,在参考期间,由于日益难以解决的问题中出现了大量的政治更替,ZRA在统治精英的政治权宜之计中经历了一些易受政治动机的机构改革和重组的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Do American Voters Really Not Punish Overt Undemocratic Behavior at the Polls? Natural Experimental Evidence from the 2021 Insurrection of the U.S. Capitol Absolute versus Relative: Asymmetric Framing and Feedback in a Heterogeneous-Endowment Public Goods Game Improving Studies of Sensitive Topics Using Prior Evidence: A Unified Bayesian Framework for List Experiments Are More Children Better Than One? Evidence from a Lab Experiment of Decision Making Financial Vulnerability and Seeking Expert Advice: Evidence from a Survey Experiment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1