Austria

This paper studies the differences between the organisation of budget management in selected government administrations in the Western Balkans and the Republic of Moldova and good practice across the European Union (EU). It observes that the ministry of finance (MoF) in these administrations typically engages in direct budget negotiations with a large number of budget organisations. This practice is in stark contrast with the budgeting approach observed in the EU, where the MoF only deals directly with government ministries and a limited number of constitutional bodies. The paper highlights the adverse consequences for the strategic role of the MoF for fiscal policy, the accountability of line ministries for budgeting and service delivery in their sector and the introduction of modern public financial management instruments such as medium-term budgeting and performance-based budgeting. This paper recommends that governments reduce the number of first-level budget organisations and give line ministries more responsibility for budget management in their sector. At the same time, the paper recommends strengthening line ministries’ accountability for budget management towards the parliament.

While means-tested benefits such as minimum income benefits (MIB) and unemployment assistance (UA) are an essential safety net for low-income people and the unemployed, incomplete take-up is the rule rather than the exception. Building on desk research, open-ended surveys and semi-structured interviews, this paper investigates the opportunities and risks of using artificial intelligence (AI) for managing these means-tested benefits. This ranges from providing information to individuals, through determining eligibility based on pre-determined statutory criteria and identifying undue payments, to notifying individuals about their eligibility status. One of the key opportunities of using AI for these purposes is that this may improve the timeliness and take-up of MIB and UA. However, it may also lead to systematically biased eligibility assessments or increase inequalities, amongst others. Finally, the paper explores potential policy directions to help countries seize AI’s opportunities while addressing its risks, when using it for MIB or UA management.

Governments are increasingly utilising research and innovation (R&I) policy to foster economic and societal change. Yet, the empirical correlation between these policies and socio-technical transformations remains under-explored. The report investigates this relationship by comparing the Recovery and Resilience Plans (RRPs) of Austria, Finland and Sweden, initiated under the NextGenerationEU framework post Covid-19. The report finds significant disparities in the content, process and transformative value of the RRPs among these countries. The differences in the content of the national RRPs, and the ability and willingness to seize the opportunity presented by the RRPs to drive transformation, are explained by existing national policy contexts and frameworks. Surprisingly, the role of R&I policy in the RRPs is less important than expected, despite its emphasised importance in literature and political rhetoric. The report further identifies implications for a transformative innovation policy as well as areas for further research.

This report takes stock of processes that promote the systematic use of evidence in decision making in Austria’s education system. It builds on an online survey among over 6500 decision makers, drawing on responses from executives in the Austrian Federal Ministry for Education, Science and Research; regional education directorates; school supervision and school leaders. The report identifies what it takes to strengthen the opportunity, capability and motivation of decision makers at all levels of the education system to use evidence effectively for their respective practice – including teaching and quality assurance. It assesses respective strengths and weaknesses in current processes and in opportunities available to decision makers. The report develops possible next steps to inform further discussions. The publication is part of OECD work on strategic education governance, which supports countries in identifying the best ways to achieve national objectives in a context of multi-level governance structures and complex environments. The work identifies and promotes effective governance processes in the domains of accountability, capacity, knowledge governance, stakeholder involvement, strategic thinking and adopting a whole-of-system perspective. This publication will be of interest to policy makers, education leaders, the education research community and all those interested in education governance.

This paper presents and discusses the general findings and key policy messages of the 2019 OECD Open, Useful and Re-usable data (OURdata) Index, and provides a detailed analysis of the results for each pillar and sub-pillar. Additionally, it assesses the main advancements and challenges related to the design and implementation of open government data (OGD) policies in OECD member and partner countries by comparing the results for 2019 with those of the 2017 edition. This policy paper contributes to the OECD work on the digital transformation of the public sector, including digital government and data-driven public sector and open government data.

In 2014 the OECD carried out work to take stock of OECD countries' achievements in building resilience to major natural and man-made disasters. The report suggested that albeit significant achievements were made through effective risk prevention and mitigation management, past disasters have revealed persistent vulnerabilities and gaps in risk prevention management across OECD. Based on the findings of this OECD-wide report a cross-country comparative study was undertaken in Austria, France and Switzerland to test the recommendations put forward in specific country contexts. This report summarises the individual and comparative country case study findings. It highlights that the risk prevention policy mix has shifted in favor of organisational measures such as hazard informed land use planning or strengthening the enforcement of risk sensitive regulations. In the meantime, the great need for maintaining the large stock of structural protection measures has been overlooked and vulnerability might increase because of that. The report highlights the need for better policy evaluation to increase the effectiveness of risk prevention measures in the future. The report highlights practices where countries succeeded to make risk prevention a responsibility of the whole of government and the whole of society, by analysing supporting governance and financing arrangements.

The effective use of school resources is a policy priority across OECD countries. The OECD Reviews of School Resources explore how resources can be governed, distributed, utilised and managed to improve the quality, equity and efficiency of school education.The series considers four types of resources: financial resources, such as public funding of individual schools; human resources, such as teachers, school leaders and education administrators; physical resources, such as location, buildings and equipment; and other resources, such as learning time.This series offers timely policy advice to both governments and the education community. It includes both country reports and thematic studies.