Defense and Security: Defense Spending, Procurement Transparency, and Oversight

Defense Spending, Procurement Transparency, and Oversight

A typical government spends 5-10 percent of its budget on defense. However, due to defense exceptionalism, these expenditures lack the transparency and oversight applied to other areas of public spending. Research shows that nearly 30 percent of countries do not publicly report actual defense spending, and only half publish disaggregated expenditure data. This makes defense spending highly susceptible to inefficiencies, misallocation, or corruption, which can ultimately weaken national security and erode public trust. Open government principles can help maximize defense effectiveness while maintaining democratic accountability.

Key Terms The Evidence Reform
Guidance Active OGP
Partners Benchmarking
Data Guidance
& Standards

Key Terms

Definitions for key terms such as defense procurement and the Tshwane Principles.

Defense Procurement: Procurement in this context refers to the process by which governments acquire goods, services, and works for defense purposes, ranging from standard office supplies to military infrastructure and specialized military equipment.
Defense Spending Transparency: Transparency of defense spending involves the proactive publication of comprehensive, disaggregated information about defense spending plans, actual expenditures, and variance explanations in accessible formats.
Parliamentary Oversight: This refers to the role of elected representatives in reviewing, questioning, and approving defense budgets, policies, and major acquisitions on behalf of the public.
Tshwane Principles: The Tshwane Principles refer to the Global Principles on National Security and the Right to Information that categorize classes of information carrying an overriding public interest in disclosure. The Principles were specifically created to advise on how to balance the competing interest of the public’s right to know with national security.

SHOW KEY TERMS

HIDE SHOW KEY TERMS

The Evidence

Open government approaches to defense spending can improve security outcomes while preventing corruption, inefficiencies, and waste.

Defense procurement transparency reduces corruption risks and improves value for money, as shown by countries with strong open contracting systems.
Parliamentary oversight of defense budgets can lead to better spending decisions and prevent misallocation of resources to ineffective programs.
Evidence from Kenya suggests that public engagement in defense planning builds legitimacy for security investments and helps identify community security priorities.
A review of defense contracts in Australia’s Federal Contracts database shows that only 2.7 percent of all such contracts are marked with a confidentiality flag, indicating that most defense contracts could be at least partially disclosed.

Reform Guidance

The recommendations below represent reforms that national and local governments, representatives of civil society organizations, and others can consider for their action plans and the Open Gov Challenge. The reforms are categorized according to OGP’s principal values: transparency, civic participation, and public accountability. Reforms should be adapted to fit the domestic context, and involve and coordinate with other levels and branches of government.

Reforms across policy areas are also tagged by the estimated degree of difficulty in implementation. Though progress is often not linear, the recommendations have been categorized using these labels to give the reader a sense of how different reforms can work together to raise the ambition of open government approaches.

Recommended Reforms Key

OGP Values

Transparency: Transparency empowers citizens to exercise their rights, hold the government accountable, and participate in decision-making processes. Examples of relevant activities include the proactive or reactive publication of government-held information, legal or institutional frameworks to strengthen the right to access information, and disclosing information using open data standards.

Civic Participation: When people are engaged, governments and public institutions are more responsive, innovative, and effective. Examples of relevant initiatives include new or improved processes and mechanisms for the public to contribute to decisions, participatory mechanisms to involve underrepresented groups in policy making, and a legal environment that guarantees civil and political rights.
Public Accountability: Public accountability occurs when public institutions must justify their actions, act upon requirements and criticisms, and take responsibility for failure to perform according to laws or commitments. Importantly, public accountability means that members of the public can also access and trigger accountability mechanisms. Examples of relevant activities include citizen audits of performance, new or improved mechanisms or institutions that respond to citizen-initiated appeals processes, and improved access to justice.
Inclusion: Inclusion is fundamental to achieving more equitable, representative, and accountable policies that truly serve all people. This includes increasing the voice, agency, and influence of historically discriminated or underrepresented groups. Depending on the context, traditionally underrepresented groups may experience discrimination based on gender, sexual identity, race, ethnicity, age, geography, differing ability, legal, or socioeconomic status.

HIDE OGP VALUES

Degree of Difficulty

Foundational: This tag is used for reforms that are the essential building blocks of a policy area. “Foundational” does not mean low ambition or low impact. These recommendations often establish basic legal frameworks and institutional structures.
Intermediate: This tag is used for reforms that are complex and often involve coordination and outreach between branches, institutions, and levels of government, with the public or between countries.
Advanced: This tag is used for reforms that close important loopholes to make existing work more effective and impactful. Specifically, “Advanced” reforms are particularly ambitious, innovative or close important loopholes to make existing work more effective, impactful or sustainable. They are often applied in mature environments where they seek to institutionalize a good practice that has already shown results.

HIDE DEGREE OF DIFFICULTY

Branch of Government

Executive: The executive branch of government is responsible for designing, implementing, and enforcing laws, policies, and initiatives. It is typically led by the head of state or government, such as a president or prime minister, along with their appointed cabinet members. The executive branch’s functions also include overseeing the day-to-day operations of the government, managing foreign affairs, and directing the country’s armed forces. In democratic systems, the executive branch is accountable to the legislature and the electorate, with its powers and limitations outlined in the constitution or legal framework of the respective country.
Legislative: The legislative branch of government is responsible for making laws and regulations and overseeing the functioning of the government. It typically consists of a body of elected representatives, such as a parliament, congress, or assembly, which is tasked with proposing, debating, amending, and ultimately passing legislation. The legislative branch plays a crucial role in representing the interests of the people, as its members are elected to office by the public. In addition to law-making, this branch often holds the power to levy taxes, allocate funds, and conduct certain investigations into matters of public concern. The structure and powers of the legislative branch are usually outlined in a country’s constitution or legal framework, and it serves as a check on the executive and judicial branches to ensure a system of checks and balances within a state.

HIDE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT

Recommended Reforms

Policy Area	Recommendation	OGP Value	Degree of Difficulty	Government Branch
Transparency	Classification and declassification Establish public guidance to ensure that records are stored and declassified after time limits, review processes, and certain information requests. For countries that have such guidance, they may seek to introduce declassification processes. The defense budget can be separated into categories according to the degree of secrecy and customized to the audience for disclosure. Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive Legislative	Transparency	Intermediate	Executive Legislative
Transparency	Right to information Narrowly define exemptions to right to information requests, with a positive list of what types of national security exemptions are allowed. Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Executive Legislative	Transparency	Foundational	Executive Legislative
Transparency	Balancing test case law Balancing tests are processes that weigh the public interest in disclosure with the exemptions to disclosure. They are administered by ministry and department officials, and require a level of legal expertise, familiarity with the right to information framework, and designated authority to make decisions about sensitive and restricted information within the defense sector. Once the officials responsible for adjudicating appeals have published their decisions, they (or jurists working with them) may update case law and guidance on how tests are applied. Parliaments may review this or require updates as political circumstances change. Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive Legislative	Transparency	Intermediate	Executive Legislative
Transparency	Implement machine-readable data standards Publish defense-related data. This can include procurement and spending data, but it should also include information on military allowances and basic needs provision, public health, safety, and the environment. It should be in machine-readable formats (such as Excel or CSV) to enable analysis by civil society, researchers, and oversight bodies. To build on this recommendation, consider working to ensure that defense-related data is interoperable with other key datasets across different systems (such as procurement, corporate ownership, and sanctions data) to maximize its usefulness in preventing corruption, inefficiencies, and waste. Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive	Transparency	Intermediate	Executive
Transparency	Publish comprehensive defense budgets Release proposed and enacted defense budgets with sufficient detail to understand spending priorities to ensure proper oversight, including disaggregated data by major categories (personnel, operations, procurement, and research and development). Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Executive Legislative	Transparency	Foundational	Executive Legislative
Transparency	Establish defense procurement transparency requirements Mandate the publication of defense procurement opportunities, contract awards, and basic contract information, with clear criteria for what constitutes genuinely sensitive information requiring classification. Provide the reason where redactions were necessary. Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Executive	Transparency	Foundational	Executive
Transparency	Create defense spending dashboards Develop user-friendly online platforms that present defense budget and spending data in accessible formats, including variance analysis between planned and actual expenditures. Such information should also be published in a timely manner. For example, the Government Defense Integrity Index run by Transparency International Defence & Security (TI-DS) requires that actual spending figures are published within six months of the end of the financial year. Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Executive	Transparency	Foundational	Executive
Transparency	Establish post-award contract transparency Require the publication of key contract details after award, including contractor information, contract values, performance metrics, and modifications or additions to the original contract, while protecting legitimately sensitive technical specifications. Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive	Transparency	Intermediate	Executive
Transparency	Publish beneficial ownership information for defense contractors Require the disclosure of ultimate beneficial ownership of companies receiving defense contracts to prevent conflicts of interest and corruption. Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Degree of Difficulty Advanced Government Branch Executive	Transparency	Advanced	Executive
Civic Participation	Conduct public consultations on defense strategies Hold public consultations on defense white papers, strategies, and major policy changes to enable meaningful engagement from academia and civil society. Such consultations can help better explain military preparedness and response in peacetime and post-conflict situations, as well as identify necessary responses to modern military tactics. Policy Area Civic Participation OGP Value Civic Participation Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Executive	Civic Participation	Foundational	Executive
Civic Participation	Establish defense procurement feedback mechanisms Create formal processes for civil society, industry representatives, and experts to provide input on procurement planning and practices. Policy Area Civic Participation OGP Value Civic Participation Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Executive	Civic Participation	Foundational	Executive
Civic Participation	Support defense journalism and research Provide training and resources to help journalists and researchers understand and analyze defense budgets and procurement processes effectively. Policy Area Civic Participation OGP Value Civic Participation Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive	Civic Participation	Intermediate	Executive
Civic Participation	Create expert advisory committees Establish independent committees with diverse expertise to review major defense acquisitions and provide public recommendations. Policy Area Civic Participation OGP Value Civic Participation Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive	Civic Participation	Intermediate	Executive
Civic Participation	Support the establishment of civil society monitoring networks Support networks of civil society organizations that can collectively monitor defense spending and procurement across different regions or sectors. Policy Area Civic Participation OGP Value Civic Participation Degree of Difficulty Advanced Government Branch Executive	Civic Participation	Advanced	Executive
Public Accountability	Strengthen parliamentary defense committees Ensure defense committees have adequate powers, resources, and expertise to effectively review defense budgets, policies, and major procurements, with requirements to regularly incorporate committee recommendations into practice. Policy Area Public Accountability OGP Value Public Accountability Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Legislative	Public Accountability	Foundational	Legislative
Public Accountability	Mandate independent defense auditing Require regular audits of defense spending and procurement by independent audit institutions, with public reporting of findings and recommendations. Policy Area Public Accountability OGP Value Public Accountability Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Executive Legislative	Public Accountability	Foundational	Executive Legislative
Public Accountability	Periodically review decisions to withhold information and the classification given Sensitivities regarding defense contracting information will reduce with the passage of time. It is good practice for review to be required by statute at least every five years. Policy Area Public Accountability OGP Value Public Accountability Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Executive Legislative	Public Accountability	Foundational	Executive Legislative
Public Accountability	Establish and strengthen whistleblower processes Ensure that public employees and security contractors working on behalf of the government have clear pathways to raise concerns. This should include whistleblower protection to incentivize reporting as well as multiple pathways, in case supervisors are involved in areas of concern. Appeals may also go directly to parliament or other independent agencies. Policy Area Public Accountability OGP Value Public Accountability Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive Legislative	Public Accountability	Intermediate	Executive Legislative
Public Accountability	Implement performance-based reporting Require regular public reporting on defense program performance, including on the achievement of stated objectives and value-for-money assessments. Policy Area Public Accountability OGP Value Public Accountability Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive	Public Accountability	Intermediate	Executive
Public Accountability	Create inter-agency oversight coordination Establish mechanisms for direct coordination between parliamentary committees, audit institutions, and anti-corruption agencies in defense oversight. Policy Area Public Accountability OGP Value Public Accountability Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive	Public Accountability	Intermediate	Executive
Public Accountability	Establish independent defense procurement oversight Create specialized independent bodies with the expertise and authority to oversee major defense procurements and investigate irregularities. Policy Area Public Accountability OGP Value Public Accountability Degree of Difficulty Advanced Government Branch Executive	Public Accountability	Advanced	Executive

Examples of Reforms from OGP and Beyond

The following examples are commitments previously made within or beyond OGP that demonstrate elements of the recommendations made above. Defense-related transparency commitments are relatively rare in OGP action plans, but general procurement and fiscal transparency reforms apply to defense sectors. For details on those reforms, explore the “Open Contracting” and “Open Budgets” chapters of the Open Gov Guide.

OGP Reforms

ALBANIA Public Participation in Defense and Security: Committed to developing an Innovation Center to better support defense readiness and innovation in national security, civil defense, and cyber security, alongside an information campaign to raise public awareness of new technological advancements.
COLOMBIA Budget Transparency and Plain Language in the Ministry of Defense: Proactively publishes the Ministry of Defense budget in simple language, a timely manner, and an open format on the ministry’s website. Published information includes data on historical appropriations, actual expenditures, and investments and operating costs, which allows the public to better understand how the ministry is spending funds. The Ministry of Defense also created a short video complementing these disclosures, explaining the size and composition of its budget.
GERMANY Arms Export Database: Committed to publishing data on arms export authorizations in a publicly available database. Though the commitment was not implemented due to the collapse of the ruling government coalition in November 2024, Germany’s effort to increase transparency in its decisions on arms exports is notable.
LITHUANIA Open Defense Public Procurement Data: Committed to opening its public procurement data in general, with a specific effort made to publish defense data. Though the commitment stalled due to a legal issue with a contractor, the explicit focus on defense data alongside other public procurement data is notable.

Beyond OGP Action Plans

BRAZIL Budgets and Parliamentary Oversight: Institutionalized the release of comparable procurement and budget data, with some participation in international confidence-building measures as an emerging regional leader in transparency of military budgets and procurement.
CANADA National Security Transparency Advisory Group: Established a National Security Transparency Advisory Group (NS-TAG) as part of a response to concerns of surveillance. This complements the country’s National Security Transparency Commitment, which aims to increase transparency in three areas—information sharing, executive branch decisions about national security, and security policy-making.
ESTONIA Public Procurement Oversight for Defense Spending: Demonstrates good public access to procurement data through e-procurement systems and effective oversight mechanisms integrated with broader digital government initiatives, according to the Government Defense Integrity Index. For example, parliament regularly reviews defense policies and laws through its National Defence Committee (NDC), which has extensive formal powers of oversight and a high level of expertise among its members. Estonia also created the Estonian Centre for Defence Investment in 2017, which centralizes the entire defense procurement process and helps inform the work of the NDC.
NETHERLANDS Collaboration between Military and Civilians: Created a process for collaboration between military personnel in mission areas and civilians and CSOs with expertise in public administration, government, law enforcement, and justice.
NORWAY Centre for Integrity in the Defence Sector: Created the Centre for Integrity in the Defence Sector in 2012, which seeks to promote and enhance professional integrity and good governance in the defense and security spheres. Its work includes collaborating with a range of civil society organizations (CSOs).
REPUBLIC OF KOREA Categorizing Sensitivity in Defense Budgeting: Increases transparency in defense budgeting while mitigating the risk of exposing highly sensitive security-related information by separating the defense budget into categories (according to the degree of secrecy) and customizing the audience for disclosure. As a result, certain budget items are presented for discussion to the entire National Assembly in an aggregated form; other budget items are only disclosed to members of a designated National Assembly Committee of National Defence in a disaggregated and detailed form; and certain budget items are further disaggregated and presented only to the Committee of National Defence.
UNITED KINGDOM Reporting and Oversight of Defense Spending: Maintains detailed public reporting on defense expenditures and major procurement programs as well as a robust oversight framework. For example, the UK Ministry of Defence also regularly publishes detailed information on defense expenditures, major project assessments, and quarterly program updates. The National Audit Office conducts independent reviews of defense spending and procurement, and parliamentary committees (such as the Public Accounts Committee and Defence Select Committee) provide additional oversight.

The Role of Local Governments

Local governments often play important roles in defense-related activities. This often includes coordinating emergency preparedness with national defense agencies, monitoring defense contractor activities in their jurisdictions, facilitating public understanding of local defense activities and their economic impacts, and ensuring transparency in local infrastructure projects that have dual civilian-military purposes.

Who is working on this topic?

A

Abuja, Nigeria

Albania

Argentina

Armenia

Austin, United States

Australia

B

Bar, Montenegro

Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic

Bosnia And Herzegovina

Brazil

Bulgaria

C

Canada

Cartagena De Indias, Colombia

Chile

Colombia

Costa Rica

Côte D'ivoire

Croatia

Czech Republic

D

Dominican Republic

E

Ecuador

El Kef, Tunisia

Elgeyo Marakwet, Kenya

Estonia

F

Finland

France

Fuvahmulah, Maldives

G

Georgia (Withdrawn)

Germany

Ghana

Greece

Guatemala

H

Honduras

I

Indonesia

Ireland

Italy

J

Jalisco, Mexico

Jordan

K

Kaduna State, Nigeria

Kenya

L

Laâyoune-Sakia El Hamra , Morocco

Larena, Philippines

Latvia

Liberia

Lithuania

M

Machakos, Kenya

Madrid, Spain

Makueni, Kenya

Malawi

Mexico

Mongolia

Montenegro

N

Nairobi, Kenya

Nandi, Kenya

Netherlands

New Zealand

Nigeria

North Macedonia

Norway

P

Panama

Papua New Guinea

Paraguay

Paris, France

Peru

Philippines

Plateau, Nigeria

Portugal

Q

Québec, Canada

R

Republic Of Moldova

Romania

Rosario, Argentina

S

San Pedro Garza García, Mexico

Santa Catarina, Brazil

São Paulo, Brazil

Scotland, United Kingdom

Sekondi-Takoradi, Ghana

Semarang, Indonesia

Serbia

Sierra Leone

Slovak Republic

South Cotabato, Philippines

Spain

T

Tangier - Tetouan - Al Hoceima, Morocco

Tarkwa Nsuaem, Ghana

Tunisia

U

Ukraine

United Kingdom

Uruguay

V

Valencian Community, Spain

Y

Yerevan, Armenia

This list reflects members with commitments in the “Open Contracting” policy area of the Data Dashboard, which includes defense-related initiatives.

Active OGP Partners

The following organizations have recently worked on this issue in the context of OGP at the national or international level. They may have additional insights on the topic. Please note that this list is not exhaustive. If you are interested in national-level initiatives, please contact [email protected].

Benchmarking Data

The OGP 2023-2028 Strategy sets out the Open Gov Challenge and aims to provide clear benchmarks for performance through reliable data.

While benchmarks for individual countries and Open Gov Guide recommendations are not yet integrated, for this chapter, interested individuals may rely on the following data sets:

The Government Defence Integrity Index (GDI) by Transparency International Defence and Security (TI-DS) measures institutional resilience to corruption in national defense establishments and includes a comprehensive assessment of transparency and accountability across countries. The data covers specific measures for procurement transparency, budget disclosure, and parliamentary oversight. The latest version of the Index (2020) is available here.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) runs a Military Expenditure Database, which offers global data on military spending trends and a comparative analysis across countries and regions.
The Open Budget Survey by the International Budget Partnership includes an assessment of defense budget transparency as part of broader fiscal transparency measurements, with specific questions about defense spending disclosure.

Guidance & Standards

While the list below is not exhaustive, it aims to provide a range of recommendations, standards, and analysis to guide reform in this policy area.

Transparency International Defence & Security, part of Transparency International, published comprehensive guidance on implementing transparency while protecting legitimate security interests.
Facilitated by the Open Society Justice Initiative, the Tshwane Principles on National Security and the Right to Information offer global standards for balancing transparency with legitimate security needs, with specific guidance on defense procurement disclosure.

The Open Contracting Partnership’s Mythbusting Confidentiality in Public Procurement report provides arguments for reducing secrecy in defense contracting.
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) provides structured guidance for CSOs on the role they can play in democratic security sector oversight.

Featured Resources

Data Dashboard

Access data on OGP commitments. Filter commitments by location, policy area, and year. Search by keyword.

21st January 2023

Broken Links

How can open data help shine a light on political corruption and make political systems fairer and more inclusive? How can we further link people and data to create a chain of accountability? Explore our new report.

13th September 2022

The Skeptic’s Guide to Open Government – 2022 Edition

Evidence continues to show that open government affects people’s lives. But there are still skeptics who are not aware of all the benefits associated with this approach. Use this guide to convince them to take an open government approach when implementing reforms.

16th May 2022

Defense and Security