Reforming Budget Systems in Countries of the Former Soviet Union

The countries of the former Soviet Union (FSU) required considerable revision to their budget processes and procedures to establish systems consistent with transformation from controlled dependencies within a larger planned economy to independent governments of fledgling market-oriented democracies. This article considers the degree to which preexisting, reforming, and reformed budget systems in FSU countries deliver the basic expectations of a public sector resource allocation system. Evidence indicates failures to realign budgeting and finance systems designed for command and control environments to the demands of more market based economic systems, with effects often magnified by the hybrid economies of these transitional states. Significant difficulties and shortcomings in the ability of existing systems to perform basic public sector allocation, management, and control functions are the result, but some countries are ahead of others and their experience can guide reforms across the FSU.     

State budget periodicity: An analysis of the determinants and the effect on state spending

Much of the public budgeting literature focuses on the institutional rules of budgeting and how those rules affect process and outcomes. This study focuses on a particularly rudimentary rule of budgeting: the length of the budget period. State budgets are dictated (constitutionally or statutorily) to recur over one-or two-year intervals. Statistical analysis of the determinants of state budget periodicity shows that the more states spend, ceteris paribus, the more likely they are to budget annually. I hypothesize that budget periodicity has the opposite effect on spending: Biennial budget states spend more, ceteris paribus, than annual budget states spend. Ordinary least squares analysis does not support the hypothesis, but with instrumental variable methods, biennial budgeting exhibits a positive and statistically significant effect on state spending.     

The Ups and Downs of State Budget Process Reform: Experience of Three Decades

From zero-base budgeting to the Government Performance and Results Act, state budgeting systems have been synonymous with budgeting reform for over 30 years. This article examines the trends, both long-term and short-term, which have been identified through analysis of state budgeting office practices. Particular emphasis has been placed on understanding the changes in performance measurement over the period of 1970 to 2000. The findings reveal trends such as changes in the makeup of budget office personnel, a lack of budget offices in moving toward cost accounting, and trends in budget preparation and budget documents. Some budget reforms seem to have plateaued, beginning in the mid-1990s, while other reforms have exhibited "backsliding." It is clear that the states are not all marching in unison in reforming their budget systems. As with earlier phases of this study, the 2000 data raise many questions that will be explored in future research.     

论人民代表大会在绩效预算改革中的运作与影响——以广东省A区为例

在当代中国的人民代表大会制下,加强人民代表大会对政府预算的监督是深化预算制度改革的核心内容。但是,在信息不对称的背景下,由于缺乏科学有力、具体可行的制度安排,人大的预算监督在实践中往往被大大弱化。通过参与式观察及无结构访谈的形式搜集广东省A区开展绩效预算改革的实证资料后发现,尽管以财政部门为主导的绩效预算改革模式缓解了人大与政府间的信息不对称现象而有助于加强人大的预算监督,但由于人大在改革中未能发挥主导作用而损害了绩效预算改革的最终效果。因此,发挥人大的内在优势,并以构建强化人大预算监督的制度安排为主要目标,应当是当前地方政府推行绩效预算改革的不二选择,而强化预算体制的公共性则应当是绩效预算改革的基本主轴。     

Federal Budgeting After September 11th: A Whole New Ballgame,or Is It Déjà Vu All Over Again?

Federal budgeting has undergone some profound changes since the tragic events of September 11th, 2001. Large surpluses that existed prior to September 11th and were forecast to continue have been replaced by equally large and intractable deficits. The consensus around a macro‐level norm for federal budgeting has completely broken down. In other ways, the federal budget process has not changed at all. Despite the emphasis on defense and homeland security, domestic discretionary spending is still continuing unabated, as it has since the late 1980s. Further, the federal government continues to have chronic difficulty adopting its budget in a timely fashion.     

Portfolio Budgeting in the Australian Portfolios-Principles and Practice

In the mid-eighties Australia implemented a budgeting system that is similar in its principles to the U.S. PAYGO rule and the now defunct Policy and Expenditure Management System of Canada. Termed as portfolio budgeting, it seeks to encourage greater ministerial participation (a ministry comprising a number of related departments) in the portfolio budget process. It obligates portfolio ministers to offer offsetting savings for funding new policies. Ministers have to thereby set new policy priorities so that only the most deserving new policies obtain funding through the savings identified. Additionally, portfolio budgeting requires ministers to prioritize their ongoing programs so that budget allocation to these programs reflects ministerial priorities. The article examines the practice of portfolio budgeting in the Australian portfolios in light of these objectives. The article suggests that portfolio budgeting has caused greater ministerial involvement in budgetary management. However, there has been little significant change in budget decision making at the portfolio level. The state of play of portfolio budgeting at the national budget process (cabinet and the Department of Finance) offered little incentive to portfolios to provide offsetting savings for new policy proposals. And, the appropriation structure and the organizational and political dynamics impeded ministers from allocating and reallocating their budgets (operating expenditure or running costs) for ongoing programs along ministerial priorities.     

Boom and Bust Budgeting: Repetitive Budgetary Processes in Nigeria, Kenya and Ghana

One of the least studied topics in comparative budgeting is how governments budget during economic and boom and bust cycles. Theory and past evidence suggest that national budgets of poorer countries are made and remade continuously over these periods. Case material from Nigeria as well as supplemental information from Ghana and Kenya illustrate the principal features of the persistence, types, and sequence of such repetitive budgeting. The experience of the three countries in boom and bust budgeting has considerable implications both for a theory of comparative budgeting and for national budget management and policy in Subsaharan Africa specifically.     

The Policy Constraints of Deficit Reduction: President Clinton's 1995 Budget

The federal budgeting process is now limited by deficit reduction policy constraints. This article examines the FY 1995 budget requests within the context of long term budget trends, changes in the federal budget process, and the recently established political and fiscal budget constraints. It further examines enactment of the Omnibus Budget Enforcement Act of 1993, the policy changes it contained, and its further tinkering with the process of budgeting. Finally the article evaluates the first budgeting process of the Clinton administration and their initiatives in deficit reduction following these policy constraints.     

Budgeters' Views of State Performance-Budgeting Systems: Distinctions across Branches

Given that a majority of states have had some sort of performance‐budgeting initiative on the books for several years, how has implementation of such reform progressed? To answer this question, we surveyed legislative and executive budgeters from the 50 states, asking them for their impressions of performance‐budgeting implementation in their state. Specifically, we asked these budget officers about the reasons for introducing performance budgeting in their state; the types of activities required of their system; responsible oversight bodies; extent of application across state agencies and departments; and perceived levels of effectiveness and problems experienced with implementation of the budget reform. Our findings indicate that implementation of performance‐based budgeting systems is proceeding slowly. While there are some benefits to highlight, results show that implementing performance budgeting is not without problems—perhaps the greatest being differing perceptions of use and success among budget players, particularly across branches of government.     

Is the U.S. Congress an Insurmountable Obstacle to Any “Far‐Sighted Conception of Budgeting”?

In recent years, Congress has recurrently failed to meet its minimum responsibilities in federal budgeting. This article analyzes whether it is possible to repair this problem, using concepts popularized by Allen Schick in his influential article “The Road to PPB.” His article compared the PPB reform effort to the history of budget process reforms that started with the design of the executive budget. It publicized a logical sequence of budget process improvements that started with control and then advanced through management and planning. The article did not substantially address the role of Congress, but eight years after it was published, Congress reasserted its constitutional role in the budget process. Its record of performance since then has ranged from mixed to dysfunctional. The Congress has been criticized for budgetary delays, micromanagement, myopia, procrastination, indiscipline, and an inability to prioritize intelligently. If these faults are set in stone, then an integrated system of budgeting, as described in “The Road to PPB” and related work, is unattainable. On the other hand, if reform of Congressional budgeting is politically feasible, improvements to that system can utilize the unique contributions that a legislature can make to a good system of budgeting.     

Biennial Budgeting in the Federal Government

This article examines the possible outcomes of changing from the current annual budget review to biennial budgeting. It looks at the experience of various states and its application to the federal level. It explores all of the supposed benefits , including less time spent on budgeting issues, more accurate budget projections, reduction of congressional workload and increased congressional oversight and, for the president's point of view, increased power of the executive branch. Concluding on a cautious note, the article offers some plausible applications of biennial budgeting to the national budget.     

Does Performance Budgeting Work? An Examination of the Office of Management and Budget’s PART Scores

In this paper, the authors use the Bush administration's management grades from the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) to evaluate performance budgeting in the federal government—in particular, the role of merit and political considerations in formulating recommendations for 234 programs in the president's fiscal year 2004 budget. PART scores and political support were found to influence budget choices in expected ways, and the impact of management scores on budget decisions diminished as the political component was taken into account. The Bush administration's management scores were positively correlated with proposed budgets for programs housed in traditionally Democratic departments but not in other departments. The federal government's most ambitious effort to use performance budgeting to date shows both the promise and the problems of this endeavor.     

Regulatory budgeting: A bad idea whose time has come?

Advocates of regulatory relief propose a budget that would annually cap regulatory costs. But emulating fiscal budgeting would be much more difficult than they envision. An arbitrary macrobudgetary constraint would have to be selected, and the potential scope of the regulatory budget would be vast. The process of regulatory budgeting would be very-time consuming, and could increase micromanagement by the Congress. Estimating regulatory costs would be challenging, and ignoring regulatory benefits would be unfair and inefficient. A preferable alternative to regulatory budgeting would be to expand the Government Performance and Results Act to include cost-effectiveness reviews for regulations.     

Performance Budgeting: The Perspective of State Agencies

Although performance‐based budgeting requirements are pervasive, what remains a challenge is how to gain the support from all stakeholders in the budget process that are essential to the integration of performance information with budgeting. This study examines the perspective and role of state agencies on performance budgeting. The finding indicates that for agencies to conduct performance‐informed budgeting, the focus needs to be on elevating managerial capacity to use performance information, and improving measurement quality. Moreover, it is crucial to recognize that performance budgeting is a collaborative process in which each participant plays a valuable role.     

The Fables and Foibles of Federal Capital Budgeting

This article critically evaluates the notions behind proposals to institute capital budgeting at the federal level. Four critical assumptions are found to be behind the contention that capital budgeting will improve federal investment policies: (1) an agreed-upon and accepted definition of a capital budget exists; (2) a capital budget "adds value" by improving the quality of information; (3) better information leads to better decisions; (4) better decisions lead to better actions. Each of these assumptions is evaluated using examples drawn from various levels of government and from the private sector. The general finding is that if these assumptions hold, then it is reasonable to expect that capital budgeting will lead to better programmatic decisions. Unfortunately, one or more of these assumptions usually does not hold and for this reason the case for federal capital budgeting is not very strong     

Performance Budgeting and Performance Funding in the States: A States Assessment

For a variety of reasons, performance budgeting has gained new life in the 1990s. Initially introduced in the 1950s by the Hoover Commission and others, performance budgeting efforts, in the 1990s, go beyond the workload productivity and efficiency focus of earlier phases and place greater emphasis on outcomes and accountability. This study reports on a survey of state executive-branch budget officers designed to determine the current status of state performance budgeting efforts including performance budgeting processes used by the states, their perceived impacts on budget decision making, and their probable future use. In addition, the study assessed the emerging role of performance funding as a further extension of performance budgeting processes. The linking of performance to the allocation or distribution of appropriated funds may be emerging as the next iteration of performance budgeting in the states. In addition to reporting on the survey, relationships between performance budgeting and various aspects of state budgeting practices are analyzed through crosstabulations, and regression analysis is employed to examine the states' organization, fiscal, and political capacity to implement performance budgeting and funding.     

Budgeting for Fiscal Stability over the Business Cycle: A Countercyclical Fiscal Policy and the Multiyear Perspective on Budgeting

This essay is a theoretical exploration of a new budgetary system to cope with fiscal uncertainty and instability. ¹ It examines policies requiring positive year-end balances and infers that annual budget cycles lead to a mismatch between the budget cycle and the continuity of public service provision. The author considers a multiyear perspective on budgeting as a potential solution, with countercyclical fiscal reserves to help ensure stability during fluctuating economic conditions. By adopting budget stabilization funds and keeping sufficient reserves, states can better maintain trend-level public services during recessions. Panel data analysis provides empirical evidence that such funds helped stabilize state general expenditures during downturns. The adoption of countercyclical fiscal policy and budget stabilization funds is a step toward a longer-term perspective on budgeting, thus promoting fiscal stability over the economic cycle.     

Budget Control in Virginia Public School Districts

This article examines the selection and use of a budget approval technique. Specifically, two research questions are addressed: (1) Does the use of a particular budget approval method by a governmental body impact the execution of the budget? (2) What characteristics of a local government are associated with its decision to use a particular budget approval method? Both research questions are addressed by analyzing data from public school systems in the Commonwealth of Virginia, specifically, whether using categorical budget approval differs in the accuracy of budgeting versus using a lump-sum approval method. Characteristics of Virginia school districts are also analyzed according to whether any of them are likely to be associated with school districts using a particular approval method. The remainder of this article is organized as follows: the next section describes the role of budgeting control in schools; subsequent sections review Virginia school district budgeting practices, develop the empirical model used to test the hypotheses, describe the sample, analyze the results of empirical tests and discuss implications of the findings.