Budgeting in Slovenia During the Democratic Transition

Slovenia represents an interesting and important case in the study of comparative budgeting in post-socialist countries during democratization and economic reform. Compared to Hungary and other nations in the region, Slovenia has had more budget stability and has maintained fiscal balances through shared political norms and strong ministerial guardianship. Political culture, institutional capacity, and the nature of governing coalitions all affected budget outcomes. In general, Slovenia has moved more quickly to reform its budgetary institutions and processes but still faces a range of difficult budget issues and choices.     

From Performance Budgeting to Performance Budget Management: Theory and Practice

This article examines the decades‐long practices of performance budgeting in different countries and their associated challenges from a multilayered institutional framework. Based on theory and lessons learned, the article recommends an array of strategies to address institutional and organizational barriers. It also proposes to reconceptualize performance budgeting as a performance budget management system and suggests how multiyear budget planning, financial risk assessment, policy planning, the departmental budget cycle, the program budget cycle, stakeholder engagement, regular spending reviews, and performance audits should be integrated more closely to address the long‐term fiscal challenges faced by many governments and to respond to the public pressure on agencies to do more with less.     

From Porto Alegre to New York City: Participatory Budgeting and Democracy

Because of its popularity, there is now a large literature examining how participatory budgeting (PB) deepens participation by the poor and redistributes resources. Closer examinations of recent cases of PB can help us to better understand the political configurations in which these new participatory democratic spaces are embedded, and articulate the conditions that might lead to more meaningful outcomes. Who participates? For whose benefit? The articles in this symposium, on participatory budgeting in New York City (PBNYC), highlight both strengths and challenges of the largest American PB process. They focus less on redistribution, more on the dimensions of the process itself and of PBNYC’s successful social inclusion, new dynamics between participants and local politicians, and the subtleties of institutionalization. The symposium also reminds us, however, that contestations over meaningful participation are on-going, and that of all of PBNYC’s multiple goals, equity has proven to be the most elusive.     

From Cash to Accrual Budgeting and Accounting in the Public Sector: The Dutch Experience

Traditionally, governments used to deploy input‐based budgeting systems and cash‐based accounting systems. However, these systems do not provide the information that is necessary for a government to operate efficiently and effectively. Therefore, a growing number of countries have already shifted or are planning to shift from cash‐based to some form of accrual accounting in the public sector. Usually, the implementation of some accrual‐based system is linked to wider financial management reforms including performance management requiring information on cost. This paper focuses on the Dutch experience with the shift from cash‐based accounting and budgeting systems to an accrual‐based system.     

Post-Keynesian Public Budgeting & Finance: Assessing Contributions From Modern Monetary Theory

While Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) offers contributions that are worthy of serious consideration, some additional theory-building and synthesis with existing theory may be in order to tie MMT into the established budgeting literature. MMT focuses primarily on monetarily sovereign governments. These are governments that face extremely “soft” budget constraints insofar as they: issue and regulate the value of their own currencies, possess central banks that function as the fiscal agents of their government treasuries, are able to issue sovereign debt denominated in their domestic currency, and operate in a system of freely-floating currency exchange rates, with a minimum of currency and capital controls. National governments that are sovereign according to these criteria are able to make all debt service payments as they come due, virtually without regard to their level of outstanding debt; they cannot be forced to default against their will. They are also macroeconomically-autonomous. It is the collective position of the symposium papers that these conditions describe, in precise terms, the fiscal position of the U.S. federal government. As such, the existence of an ultra-soft U.S. government budget constraint is grounded in the extremely favorable conditions of money and credit that the federal government is subject to, and which in fact it has created and nurtured for itself since the Second World War. An important implication is that the federal level budgeting literature cannot ignore the macroeconomics and the administration of a sovereign currency regime, nor the monetary economics that ungirds it, without sustaining charges of unrealism.     

The Evolution of Local Government Budgeting in Poland: From Accounting to Policy in a Leap and a Bound

The evolution of U.S. public budgeting has been described by Schick (1966) as a progression from a control orientation to a management and then a planning orientation. Lee (1992) has tracked the evolution of central budgeting staff largely from a group of accountants to a more varied set of backgrounds, dominated by public administration and general liberal arts educations. As Poland decentralizes fiscal and administrative responsibilities and powers to gminas (local self-governments), the gmina councils are beginning to view the budget as more than a financial accounting tool proscribed and prescribed by the central government. They are beginning to see the potential for using the budget as a policy and management tool. The evolutionary transformation of budgeting, which took fifty years in the United States, may take only five years in Poland. The evidence for this metamorphosis is based on interviews with several gmina city budgeters, with special attention devoted to the city of Lublin.     

Gubernatorial Transition in Florida: A Look at How Politics, Budgeting, and Policy Analysis Interface

This article details the use of policy-focused transition teams during Florida's most recent gubernatorial transition. In a marked shift from the past, the most recent transition separated the appointments and policy advisory functions. The inseparable nature of politics, budgeting, and policy analysis are demonstrated via: (1) an analysis of the transition budget; (2) a detailed look at team structures and their role in agency performance evaluation; (3) a calculation of the fiscal and policy impacts of team recommendations; (4) post-session assessments of the governor's first legislative agenda; and (5) post-transition interviews with key participants.     

Conclusion: Time for Participatory Budgeting to Grow Up

Only a few years ago, participatory budgeting (PB) in the US was in its infancy, a tiny experiment in democracy. After a five-year growth spurt, PB has entered its awkward adolescence, full of bold achievements, flashes of potential, and some stumbles. PBNYC’s innovation has raised new questions for participatory democracy, as the contributors to this special issue highlight. In this article, I lift up the key impacts and challenges that they discuss, and their practical implications. I argue that for PBNYC and other PB processes to grow up, city leaders need to invest in equity, expand project eligibility and funding, and scale PB up to the city level.     

Participatory Budgeting and Community-Based Research: Principles,Practices, and Implications for Impact Validity

Research and evaluation is an integral part of the Participatory Budgeting (PB) process. Since PB in New York City (PBNYC) is designed to be a democratic and community-based initiative that is grounded in the values of equity and inclusion, it is important that the research and evaluation methods used to study the process and its participants adhere to the same principles. For the past five years, a team of community-based researchers, academics, and PB participants have designed research questions and instruments, implemented data collection, analyzed and shared data with PB participants and practitioners, and issued reports to the wider public. Like PB, the research design is rooted in the communities where PB is operating. The research is not intended to sit on a shelf but is actively used by participants and practitioners to help reflect on the process, improve deliberation in decision-making, and strengthen the process and outcomes of PB. This article will discuss Participatory Action Research principles used by the Community Development Project of the Urban Justice Center, explore the applicability of these principles to the Participatory Budgeting research context, and explain how these practices have helped to deepen and improve the process and outcomes of PBNYC.