Public Expenditure Management

Back Matter

Back Matter

Author(s):
A. Premchand
Published Date:
March 1993
    Share
    • ShareShare
    Show Summary Details
    Appendix I Expenditure Management Process: Modular Presentation

    The expenditure management processes in 46 countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Europe are illustrated in the following tables in terms of seven modules. Module 1 shows the institutions and operational approaches in regard to the macroeconomic framework. Module 2 provides information on budget preparation and planning background. Module 3 illustrates the coverage of the budget. Module 4 delineates the controls exercised in terms of commitments and payments. Module 5 shows the present state of information systems, while Module 6 provides information on the agencies and interdepartmental bodies that have a role in budget administration and related decision making. Module 7 shows the practices in regard to classification of the budget. Modules 3 and 7 provide a basis for broadly assessing the accountability of the expenditure management system.

    These modules help in understanding the relative roles of various agencies, the systems in operation, and the operational techniques. A more detailed analysis of these areas would also identify the vulnerable areas and their possible impact on expenditure management, but such an analysis is beyond the scope of this appendix.

    The countries illustrated in the modules include those that are considered part of the British Commonwealth (Bangladesh and India); systems of the French type (Morocco and Tunisia); centrally planned economies (China); and Latin American countries. For convenience, African countries are divided into two groups—countries of the British Commonwealth type and of the French type. In each case, X shows that the feature is applicable to that country;—shows that it is inapplicable; and … indicates that data are unavailable.

    GROUP I

    Module 1.Macroeconomic Framework
    Basis and MethodologyUse of Material
    CountryAgencies ResponsibleMedium-term planForecasting modelsAlternative scenariosImpact analysisContingency reviewBudget guidanceBackground material
    Bangladesh1. Planning Commission
    2. Technical Group of the Resource Committee
    3. Ministry of Finance
    4. Central (Bangladesh) Bank
    Five-Year PlanMacroeconomic framework with sectoral planningXX
    Bhutan1. Planning Commission
    2. Ministry of Finance
    3. Economic Committee of Royal Government
    Five-Year planBroad macroeconomic framework, sectoral planning, and compilation of public investment programsX
    Ministry of Finance and Economic Committee
    XX
    ChinaState Planning CommissionXXXX
    India1. Ministry of Finance
    2. Planning Commission
    Five-Year PlanNoNoNoNoXX
    IranThe Plan and Budget OrganizationFive-Year RanSectoral simple modelXX
    Nepal1. Ministry of Finance
    2. National Planning Commission
    Five-Year Development PlanXXXAnnual
    X
    XX
    Papua New Guinea1. Department of Finance and Planning
    2. Bank of Papua New Guinea
    Five-Year Public Investment Program for Capital ProjectsXX
    Sri LankaMinistry of Finance and PlanningFive-Ysar Plan for investment only; revised annuallyMacroeconomic frameworkBeing developedAlternate growth scenario in terms of reserve targets and import levelsXX
    As White Paper on major macro developments as background to budget speech
    X
    Various reports
    Thailand1. Ministry of Finance (Bureau of Budget)
    2. National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB)
    3. Bank of Thailand (BOT)
    Five-Year Development Plan; Three-Year Rolling Plan for public borrowingXXXXXX
    Report of BOT, Fiscal Policy Office (FPO), NESDB, Budget Information Center
    Tonga1. Ministry of Finance
    2. Central Planning Department
    Five-Year Development PlanBread macroeconomic frameworkXX
    Module 2.Budget Preparation and Planning Background
    Budget GuidelinesBudget Discussion/Appraisal*Manpower ControlDevelopment Plan
    CountryCeilingPriceabcdefCoat AnalysisPersonnel admininstrationBudgetDurationAgencyMedium-Term Rolling PlanAnnual Plan
    BangladeshXXLimited to projectsXLimited analysisMinistry Of Home Affairs (poets and appointments)Budget DivisionFive-Year PlanPlanning CommissionAnnual development program
    BhutanAs percentage of last year’s budget in current expenditureXXXXRoyal Civil Service Commission (recruitment, appointment, promotion); Ministry of Finance (compensation policy)Department of National Budget and AccountsSixth Five-Year Plan 1986–91Planning Commission
    ChinaFor economic constructionPartlyXXXFive-Year PlanState Planning CommissionYes
    IndiaXNew projectsMinistry of Finance (creation)Five-Year planPlanning CommissionYes
    IranXXXXSometimesX
    Capital
    X
    Flexible ceiling
    ProjectsPrime Minister’s Administrative Office and Employer OrganizationXFive-Year PlanPlan and Budget OrganizationX
    NepalXXXXXXXMinistry of Finance and sectoral agencyGeneral Administration MinistryMinistry of FinanceFive-Year planNational Planning CommissionX
    Papua New GuineaXCurrentXXX1. Public Services Commission
    2. Department of Personnel Management
    Department of Finance and PlanningDepartment of Finance and PlanningAnnual segment of public Investment program
    Sri LankaIndication of broad area of prioritiesXXXIn detail for projectsBudget BureauFive-Year Plan for Investment onlyMinistry of Finance and Planning
    ThailandCeilings are set by sectoral analysis (Bureau of Budget)An escalation factor for capital projectsXXXX
    NESDB
    PPBS ia partially used. Cost benefit analysis is used for Investment programs in NESDBCivil Service Commission (the Prime Minister’s Office)Bureau of BudgetFive-Year PlanNo specific agencyThree-year rolling plan for public borrowing in conformity with NESDBs macroeconomic and investment planYes (attempt to coordinate Development Plan and Annual Budget)
    TongaXCurrentXXXEstablishment Office, Prime Minister’s OfficeMinistry of FinanceFive-Year PlanCentral Planning Department

    a = item-by-item; b = incremental; c = fixed ceiling; d = program and performance; e = priority listing; f = open-ended.

    Module 3.Budget Coverage
    Special FeaturesState Government/Local AuthoritiesPublic Enterprises
    CountryFiscal YearAnnexed to budgetExtra budgetaryIncluded in budgetSeparate budgetBudgetAnnexedIndependent
    BangladeshJuly–JuneXX
    BhutanJuly–JuneDefense expenditures not included in National BudgetLocal authorities (Dzongkhags) and National Urban Development Corporation and City Corporations (Municipal Administration) included in National BudgetEquity participation and subsidies of central government departments to public enterprises included in National BudgetPublic enterprises and corporations have separate budgets
    ChinaJanuary-DecemberOff-budget fundsXX
    IndiaApril–MarchNoNoXX
    IranApril–MarchContingency fundsXTransfers and subsidiesX
    NepalJuly 16–July 15XXOnly equity participation and foreign aidX
    Papua New GuineaJanuary–DecemberX(Equity participation)X
    Sri LankaJanuary–DecemberNumerous extra-budgetary fundsXX
    Submitted to Parliament
    ThailandOctober–SeptemberBudget document includes annex for details of state enterprise operations and accountsTreasury’s budget excludes items financed by foreign resources (about 200 earmarks)XX
    TongaJuly–JuneX(Equity participation)X
    Module 4.Financial Control
    Precommitment ControlCommitment AccountingIssue of Checks
    CountryFinanceTenders and otherMinistriesFinance (EDP)MinistryFinanceSelf-Accounting Units
    BangladeshSecretary of each ministry or division as principal accountantX
    (Controller General of Accounts)
    Ministry of Defense, Railway Service, Public Works Division, Forest Division, Radio Bangladesh Post, Telegraph and Telephone
    BhutanDepartment of National Budget and Accounts for Capital ExpenditureEach ministry, department, and Dzonghhag (local) administrationEach ministry, department, and Dzongkhag (local) administrationDefense
    ChinaXX
    IndiaMinistry of Finance (over and above specified limits)Certain contracts centralized, others decentralizedXXYes
    Defense Railways and other organizations
    IranXX
    Treasury
    Cultural and public welfare-oriented agencies Public corporations
    NepalXXXXX
    Papua New GuineaXSelf-Accounting DepartmentSelf-Accounting DepartmentXSelf-Accounting Department
    Sri LankaXXXRailways, Post, and Tele-communications
    ThailandBureau of BudgetComptroller General’s OfficeSpecial accounts outside Treasury’s account
    TongaAccountant General’s OfficeXXAccountant General’s OfficeAccountant General’s OfficeMinistry of Defense
    Module 5.Fiscal Reporting
    Type of ReportResponsibilityMain Aims of ReportsReport Received by
    CountryAccountingFiscalMinistriesFinanceExpenditure controlCash flow managementFiscal reviewTime LagMinistry of FinanceAuditCabinetHead of state
    Bangladesh1. Monthly accounts (excluding Ministry of Defense) of spending agenciesNo comprehensive fiscal reporting system. However, Monthly Economic Situation Report and Monthly Disbursement Report on foreign aid prepared by Ministry of FinanceRegional account officers and departmentalized accountantsAccountant GeneralLimitedX
    (As reported by the Bangladesh Bank)
    LimitedMinimum 45 days for monthly accountsXX
    2. Fiscal accounts (including Ministry of Defense)Ministry of FinanceXMinimum 3 monthsX
    Bhutan1. Monthly account (consolidated and submitted to Department of National Budget and Accounts by ministries, departments, and Dzongkhags)Fiscal reporting system covering Ministry of Finance, Planning Commission, Royal Monetary Authority, and Ministry of Trade and IndustryLine ministries, departments, and Dzongkhags (local) administrations1. For monthly compilation and audit. Department of National Budget and AccountsXXXAbout 2 monthsDeputy Minister of FinanceAuditor General’s Office(Economic Committee)
    2. Final accounts2. Department of National Budget and AccountsOne yearDeputy Minister of FinanceXCabinetHer Royal Highness (at Ministry of Finance)
    China1. Monthly accounts
    2. Annual accounts
    1. Bank of Construction
    2. Industrial and Commercial Bank
    3. Agricultural Bank
    4. Bank of China
    5. Bank of Communication
    Ministry of finance for consolidationCompliance with laws1. 10 days
    2. 3 or 4 months after year ends
    XOnly annual reportsX
    India1. Monthly accounts
    2. Consolidated Annual Appropriation Accounts
    NoController General of Civil Accounts Ministry of FinanceXX
    Iran1. Quarterly accounts
    2. Annual accounts
    Quarterly reportsXX
    (Accountant General)
    XXX
    X
    X
    X
    XX
    Nepal1. Monthly accountsReports of Central BankLine ministriesComptroller GeneralXXXXX
    Papua New Guinea1. Monthly accounts
    2. Quarterly accounts
    3. Annual accounts
    XXXAbout 2 months (each case)XX
    Sri Lanka1. Monthly accounts
    2. Annual accounts
    Monitoring by broad aggregates by Fiscal Policy Monitoring Unit Of Ministry of FinanceTreasury (Director of Accounts and Payments)XX
    (Flash reports)
    X
    X
    1. 2–3 months
    2. 4 months
    X
    X
    X
    Thailand1. Monthly Treasury accounts
    2. Annual Treasury accounts
    Fiscal Policy Office provides limited fiscal reports and compiles information on domestic and external public debtsComptroller General’s Office (CGO) and Provincial Treasury (centrally proceased)XXX
    X
    1. 20 days
    2. About 1 month
    X
    Subcommittee on fiscal and monetary policy
    X
    X
    Tonga1. Monthly accounts
    2. Annual accounts
    Accountant GeneralXXXXXX(Prime Minister’s Office)
    Module 6.Budget Administration and Decision Making
    Central AgenciesExecutiveLegislative
    CountryPlanning authorityMinistry of FinanceOtherBudget committeesCabinet or Council of MinistersLegislatureHead of state
    BangladeshMinistry of PlanningMinistry of Finance
    1. Technical Group of Resource Committee (which includes staff of National Board of Revenue Budget Division and Bank of Bangladesh)
    2. Economic Advisor’s Wing of Finance Ministry
    1. Expenditure Division of Finance (current budget)
    2. National Revenue Board (for revenue)
    3. External Resources Division of Finance (external grants and loans)
    4. Finance Advisor of Resource Commission
    Council of MinistersStanding Committee of Parliament and Parliament (Enactment of Appropriations Bill)
    BhutanPlanning CommissionMinistry of FinanceRoyal Monetary Authority, Ministry of Trade and Industry, and Ministry of Foreign AffairsMinistry of Finance (Department of Nalional Budget and Accounts), Planning CommissionCouncil of MinistersHer Royal Highness, Representative of the King in the Ministry of Finance
    ChinaState Planning CommissionXState CouncilPeople’s Council (state, provinces, counties, and municipalities)
    IndiaPlanning CommissionMinistry of FinanceXX
    IranPlan and Budget OrganizationMinistry of Economic Affairs and FinanceBudget Committee and Economic CouncilXXX
    NepalNational Planning CommissionMinistry of FinanceXX
    Papua New GuineaDepartment of Finance and PlanningXBank of Papua New Guinea1. Resource Management Committee
    2. National Planning Committee
    3. National Economic Council
    CabinetParliament
    Sri LankaMinistry of Planning and FinanceCentral Bank of Sri LankaMinistry of Finance and Planning Secretaries of select ministriesSubcommitteeCommittee of the Whole House
    ThailandNational Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB) (capital expenditures and development budget)Bureau of Budget (BOB) and FiscaJ Policy Office (FPO) (budget formulation)1. Prime Minister’s Office (current expenditures)
    2. Bank of Thailand and Fiscal Policy Office (in public debt and financing)
    3. Including National Debt Committee and Committee of External Debt
    4. Department of Economic and Technical Cooperation (DETC) (foreign grants)
    Bureau of Budget (Budget scrutinizing committee)CabinetParliamentKing of Thailand signs approved budget
    TongaCentral Planning DepartmentMinistry of FinanceCabinetParliamentPrivy Council
    Module 7.Budget Classification
    Object ClassificationObject Classification
    RecurrentNonrecurrent (development)
    CurrentCapitalConstruction
    CountryWages and salariesGoods and servicesMaintenanceTransfers and subsidiesDebt serviceCapital itemsFinancial investmentCapital transfersLand and property acquisitionsAssets and equipmentOther costsLine itemFunctionalOrganizationalProgram
    BangladeshXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    BhutanXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    The object classification is bar sed on standard object code
    ChinaXBroadlyBroadlyPartlyXBroadly (economic construction)
    (No standardized application of current capital distinction)

    (No standardized application of current capital distinction)
    XX
    IndiaXXXXXXXXXXXX
    IranXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    NepalXXXXXXXXXX
    Papua New GuineaXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    Sri LankaXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    ThailandXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    TongaXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

    GROUP II

    Module 1.Macroeconomic Framework
    Basis and MethodologyUse of Material
    CountryAgencies ResponsibleMedium-term planForecasting modelsAlternative scenariosImpact analysisContingency reviewBudget guidanceBackground material
    Ethiopia1. Office of the National Committee for Central Planning (ONCCP)
    2. Ministry of Finance
    3. Ministry of Foreign Trade
    4. National Bank
    One- to Ten-Year Plans ((a) Two-Year Plan; (b) Three-Year Plan; (c) Five-Year Plan); Foreign Exchange PlanEstimatesFinancialX
    Annual
    XX
    Gambia, The1. Ministry of Finance
    2. Ministry of Economic Planning and Industrial Development (MEPID)
    3. Central Bank
    XXXX
    Ghana1. Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning
    2. Bank of Ghana
    3. National Revenue Secretariat
    4. Ghana Statistical Service
    Annual and Three-Year Plan (PIP) (structural adjustment program)XX
    Jointly by Ghana Statistical Service and Bank of Ghana
    X
    Mid-year
    XiX
    Lesotho1. Ministry of Finance and Planning (MOFP)
    2. Central Bank
    Five-Year PlanX
    Malawi1. Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning
    2. Reserve Bank
    XXXXXX
    Mauritius1. Ministry of Finance
    2. Ministry of Planning
    3. Central Bank
    Three- to Five-Year Plans. Balance of Payments Forecasts, Central BankX
    Estimates
    6 monthsX
    Morocco1. Ministry of Planning
    2. Ministry of Finance
    Five-Year PlanTheoretical broad macroeconomic framework as well as sectoral planning with compilation of public investment programs, in practiceAlternative growth scenariosXX
    Somalia1. Ministry of Planning
    2. Ministry of Finance
    3. Central Bank
    Five-Year Development Plan and Three-Year Public Investment Plan of rolling plan natureVery limited macroeconomic framework and sectoral planningX
    Agricultural and livestock sectors
    XX
    Tanzania1. Ministry of Finance
    2. Central Bank
    3. Ministry of Trade
    4. Planning Commission
    Five-Year PlanXXX
    (Local government, agriculture)
    XX
    Tunisia1. Ministry of Planning
    2. Ali Bach Hamba Institute for Quantitative Economics
    3. National Statistics Institute
    Five-Year PlanBroad economic forecasts and rolling financial forecastsAnnual economic budget that revisesplanLimited analysis of external sector developments and budget impact on economyOn annual basis with economic budgetX
    Economic budget
    X
    Module 2.Budget Preparation and Planning Background
    Budget GuidelinesBudget Discussion/Appraisal*Manpower ControlDevelopment Plan
    CountryCeillingPriceabcdefCost AnalysisPersonnel administrationBudgetDurationAgencyMedium-Term Rolling: PlanAnnual Plan
    EthiopiaXX
    Drought subsidies
    X
    Projects
    X
    Projects
    X
    Projects limited
    Planning Central (Personnel) MinistriesXFive-Year PlanONCCPFixed with rolling elementsX
    Annual Plan
    Gambia, TheXXXXXAnnualMEPIDXX
    GhanaXX
    Current prices
    XXX
    Recent
    X
    Projects
    X
    Limited projects and programs
    XXAnnual and Three-Year PlansMinistry of Finance and Economic Planning (MOFEP)Three-Year Rolling Plan since 1987X
    For nonpriority sectors
    LesothoXXXXXX
    In consultation with MOFP
    Five-Year PlanMOFPX
    MalawiXXXXX
    Projects
    XRollingMOFEPXX
    MauritiusXRecurrent (salaries and wages)X
    Projects
    XX
    Projects
    Establishment Division Public Service CommissionXThree-Year Plan (indirect)Ministry of Economic Planning for ProjectsPIP projects
    MoroccoXX
    Current prices
    XXXFive-Year PlanMinistry of Planning
    SomaliaXLimitedXXSome projectsLimitedLimited to development projects by donorsMinistry of LaborXFive-Year PlanMinistry of PlanningThree-Year Public Investment Plan of rolling plan natureAnnual Plan
    TanzaniaXX
    Current prices
    XXXXXXFive-Year PlanFinance PlanningThree-YearX
    TunisiaXXXXLimitedMinistry of Public EmploymentXFive-Year PlanMinistry of PlanningAnnual Economic Budget

    a = item-by-item; b = incremental; c = fixed ceiling; d = program and performance; e = priority listing; f = open-ended.

    Module 3.Budget Coverage
    Special FeaturesState Goverment/Local AuthoritiesPublic Enterprises
    CountryFiscal YearAnnexed to budgetExtrabudgetaryIncluded in budgetSeparate budgetBudgetAnnexedIndependent
    EthiopiaJuly 8–July 7XTransfers and subsidiesX
    Gambia, TheJuly–JuneXXX
    GhanaJanuary–DecemberX
    Expenditures charged by Law on the Consolidated Fund
    Partially—salaries and wagesXTransfers and subsidiesX
    LesothoApril–MarchXXX
    MalawiApril—MarchX
    Supplementary
    XThose that are subsidizedX
    MauritiusJuly–JuneGrants for recurrent and capital expenditureXTransfers and subsidiesX
    MoroccoJanuary–DecemberRadio and TV Official printing office Ports
    Land conservation and topographic work
    XX
    SomaliaJanuary–December (Calendar year)Foreign-funded development budgetSummaries of receipts and revenues of local authoritiesXX
    TanzaniaJuly–JuneXXXXX
    PartlyPartly
    TunisiaJanuary–December (Calendar year)1. Radio and TV office
    2. Post Office
    3. Government administrative agencies
    1. Economic and social government agencies
    2. Part of capital investment financed from abroad
    XX
    Module 4.Financial Control
    Precommitment ControlCommitment AccountingIssue of Checks
    CountryFinanceTenders and otherMinistriesFinance (EDP)MinistryFinanceSelf-Accounting Units
    EthiopiaXX
    1. ONCCP (foreign loan and assistance)
    2. Disbursements Authorization Department
    XState-owned enterprises
    Gambia, TheMinistry of FinanceXXXXX
    GhanaX
    (for purchases of capital items)
    XXXX
    Controller and Accountant General’s Department
    X
    LesothoXXX
    TreasuryTreasury Examination SectionAccountant General Treasury
    MalawiXXXXXX
    MauritiusXX
    Tender Board
    X
    Accountant General
    Parastatal bodies (National Pensions Fund)
    MoroccoTechnical ministriesX
    Technical ministries
    X
    Treasury Office of the Kingdom
    SomaliaMagistrate of Accounts registers quarterly warrants for recurrent accounts. Then regional and district accountants who are assigned by Accountant General to each ministry record in vote booksMinistries (domestic) Ministry of Finance (foreign)X
    Accountant General’s Department
    1. Projects
    2. Defense
    TazaniaXXXXXXX
    TunisiaXXX1. Annexed budgets
    2. Local authorities
    3. Social Security Fund
    Module 5.Fiscal Reporting
    Type of ReportResponsibilityMain Aims of ReportsReport Received by
    CountryAccountingFiscalMinistriesFinanceExpenditure controlCash flow managementFiscal reviewTime LagMinistry of FinanceAuditCabinetHead of state
    Ethiopia1. Monthly
    2. Quarterly
    3. Annual
    (Research Planning)
    1. Quarterly
    2. Annual
    X
    Accountant General
    XXX15 days
    15 days
    3 years
    X
    X
    X


    X

    X
    X
    Gambia, TheMonthly accountsXLine ministriesMinistry of Finance (Treasury)XX14 daysXX
    Ghana1. Monthly accounts
    2. Quarterly accounts
    3. Annual accounts
    X
    Daily flash cash reports of Central Bank
    XX
    Controller and Accountant General’s Department
    XXX(Varies: Monthly 15 days; quartely 2–3 months; annual accounts 1 year)XXXX
    LesothoXXX
    Treasury
    XX6 monthsXXXX
    Military Council
    MalawiXXXXXXX2–6 weeksXXX
    Final
    Mauritius1. Monthly
    2. Annual
    X
    Accountant General Accountant General
    XXX15 days
    3 months
    X
    X
    X
    Morocco1. Monthly accounts
    2. Annual accounts
    X
    X
    XX
    X
    1 month
    4 months
    Somalia1. Monthly accounts
    2. Annual accounts of ordinary budget
    Fiscal reporting system established by technical assistance from FAD/MF in 1981–42 no longer existsAccounts department of each ministryAccountant General’s DepartmentXXLimitedIn theory 10 days; actual, much longer
    4 months
    XX
    Magistrate of Accounts
    TanzaniaXXXXXXXX
    Monthly
    X
    Monthly
    X
    Quarterly
    X
    Quarterly
    Tunisia1. Monthly accounts
    2. Annual accounts
    1. Economic and Financial Report of Central Bank
    2. Annual report on developments in government finance by Ministry of Finance
    TreasuryXX
    X
    3–5 monthsX
    X

    X

    X
    Module 6.Budget Administration and Decision Making
    Central AgenciesExecutiveLegislative
    CountryPlanning authorityMinistry of FinanceOtherBudget committeesCabinetLegislatureHead of state
    EthiopiaONCCPMinistry of Finance1. Ministry of Foreign Trade
    2. National Bank
    XX
    (shengo)
    Gambia, TheMEPIDMinistry of FinanceXX
    GhanaMinistry of Finance and Economic Planning (MFEP)X
    (MFEP)
    Sector ministriesXXX
    (Legislature/ Provisional National Defense Council)
    LesothoMOFPMOFPX
    (Government Secretary, Permanent Secretary Finance, Permanent Secretary Planning, Permanent Secretary Public Service)
    X
    (Chairman of Military Council. Minister of MOFP, Minister of Public Service)
    X
    Military Council
    MalawiMinistry of Finance and PlanningMOFPXX
    MauritiusMinistry of PlanningMinistry of FinanceBank of MauritiusXX
    MoroccoMinistry of PlanningMinistry of FinanceCentral BankXXParliament
    SomaliaMinistry of PlanningMinistry of FinanceCentral BankX
    (Economic Committee of Cabinet)
    XNational Assambly enacts budget lawPresident signs approved budget
    TanzaniaPlanning CommissionMinistry of FinanceXXX
    TunisiaMinistry of PlanningMinistry of FinanceCentral Bank Ministry of EmploymentX
    Interministerial
    XNational Assembly adopts annual budgetHead of slate approves budget adopted by National Assembly
    Module 7.Budget Classification
    Object Classification
    RecurrentNonrecurrent (development)
    CurrentCapitalConstructionObject Classification
    CountryWages and salariesGoods and servicesMaintenanceTransfers and subsidiesDebt serviceCapital itemsFinancial invest mentCapital transfersLand and property acquisitionsAssets and equipmentOther costsLine itemFunctionalOrganizationalProgram
    EthiopiaXXXXXXXXXXX
    (Recurrent)
    XX
    Gambia, TheXXXXXXXXXXXX
    GhanaXXXXXXXXXX
    LesothoXXXXXXXXXXX
    MatawiXXXXXXXXXXX
    MauritiusXXXXXXXXXXXX
    MoroccoXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    SomataTreasury’s budget includes currant expenditure and development expenditureLocally financed developmental expenditureXX
    TanzaniaXXXXXXXXXXXX
    TunisiaRecurrent every chapter corresponding to a ministry:
    1. Government agencies:
    2. Interest:
    3. Functioning or administration:
    4. Public interventions:
    5. Miscellaneous and unforeseen expenditures
    By ministry and by project basis with Initial and ravised cost of ongoing projects and new projects
    1. Direct investment
    2. Financial operations
    3. Debt amortization
    XXXX

    GROUP III

    Module 1.Macroeconomic Framework
    Basis and MethodologyUse of Material
    CountryAgencies ResponsibleMedium-term planForecasting modelsAlternative scenariosImpact analysisContingency reviewBudget guidanceBackground material
    Burundi1. Ministry of Planning
    2. Ministry of Finance
    3. Regional Planning Commission
    Five-Year PlanXXX
    Central African RepublicMinistry of Planning, Economy and FinanceFive-Year Plan (1986–90)XX
    ChadMinistry of Planning
    Côte d’lvoire1. Ministry of Planning
    2. Ministry of Finance
    3. Ministry of Budget
    Annual (Loi de Programme)XX
    Guinea-Bissau1. Ministry of Planning
    2. Ministry of Commerce
    3. Central Bank
    4. General Secretariat of the Presidential Office (Economic and international cooperation)
    XXXXXXX
    Kenya1. Ministry of Ecomic Planning
    2. Ministry of Finance
    3. Bank of Kenya
    Five-Year Development Plan and Three-Year Forward Budget SystemBroad macroeconomic framework with sectoral planning and compilation of public investment programsXX
    Madagascar1. Ministry of Finance (Directorate of Program Review)
    2. Directorate of Planning
    3. Central Bank
    Three Year PlanXXXXX
    Mauritania1. Ministry of Economy and Finance
    2. Central Bank
    Three-Year PlanXXXX
    Niger1. Ministry of PlanningXXX
    Senegal1. Ministry of Planning and Cooperation
    2. Ministry of Economy and Finance
    3. General Secretariat of Presidential Office
    XXXXX
    Togo1. Ministry of Planning
    2. Ministry of Economy and Finance
    3. Rural Development and Industry
    4. Ministry of Commerce and Transport
    Five-Year PlanXXXXX
    Zaïre1. Ministry of Planning
    2. Ministry of Finance and Budget
    XXXXX
    Module 2.Budget Preparation and Planning Background
    Budget GuidelinesBudget Discussion/Appraisal*Manpower ControlDevelopment Plan
    CountryCeilingPriceabcdefCost AnalysisPersonnel AdministrationBudgetDurationAgencyMedium-Term Rotting PlanAnnual Plan
    BurundiX
    (global)
    XXX1. Ministry of Civil Service
    2. Recruitment Commission
    XFive-Year PlanMinistry of PlanningXCorrespond and budget
    Central African RepublicXX
    Current
    XXXXX(Projects)Special Institution in relation to Personnel Administration of MinistriesFive-Year PlanMinistry of Economy, Finance and PlanningTentative
    ChadXXXXXMinistry of EmploymentXMinistry of PlanningX
    Côta d’lvoireXXXXLimitedMinistry of Public EmploymentMinistry of BudgetMinistry Of PlanningLoi de Programme
    Guinea BissauXXX
    Economic sectors
    XXXXXXThree-Year Plan
    (1983–86)
    (1988–91)
    Ministry of PlanningX
    (1987)
    KenyaXImplicitly consideredXXXPublic Service CommissionXFive-Year PlanMinistry of Economic Planning(Three-Year Forward Budget System)
    MadagascarXXXXXCivil ServiceXThree-Year PlanX
    MauritaniaXXXXThree-Year PlanPlanX
    NigerXXXProjectsXXPlan
    SenegalXConstantXXXXXXXMinistry of Civil ServiceMinistry of FinanceFive-Year Plan (some projects six years)Ministry of Planning and CooperationX
    Three-Year
    One-Year Investment Budget
    TogoXX
    Current
    XXXMinistry of PlanningX
    ZaïreXXXXXXMinistry Of Civil ServiceXMedium-termMinistry of PlanningXX

    a = item-by-item; b = incremental; c = fixed ceiling; d = program and performance; e = priority listing; f = open-ended.

    Module 3.Budget Coverage
    Special FeaturesState Government/Local AuthoritiesPublic Enterprises
    CountryFiscal YearAnnexed to budgetExtrabudgetaryIncluded in budgetSeparate budgetBudgetAnnexedIndependent
    BurundiJanuary–DecemberXXMunicipal administrationsXX
    Central African RepublicXXX
    ChadJanuary–December (calendar)1. Military expenditure
    2. Some operations of local authorities
    XX
    Côte d’lvoireJanuary–December (calendar)1. Radio and television
    2. Direction of examinations
    3. Direction of public works
    4. Newspaper agency
    5. National printing agency
    Capital expenditure financed from abroadXX
    Guinea-BissauXXXXXX
    KenyaJuly–JuneNational Social Security FundXX
    MadagascarJanuary–DecemberXXXX
    Mauritania(Gestion)1. Investment budget
    2. Public enterprises investment budget
    Special accountsXInvestment budgetX
    NigerOctober–SeptemberXXX
    SenegalJuly 1–June 30XXX
    TogoJanuary–DecemberAutonomous public establishments; universitiesXXX
    ZaïreJanuary–DecemberXXXX
    Module 4.Financial Control
    Precommitment ControlCommitment AccountingIssue of Checks
    CountryFinanceTenders and otherMinistriesFinance (EDP)MinistryFinanceSelf-Accounting Units
    BurundiX
    (Budget department)
    XXXXX
    Central African RepublicXX
    (Budget Department Fiscal Control Department)
    X
    Budget Department Treasury Department
    Semiautonomous Debt Amortization Fund Public enterprises
    ChadXX
    Treasury
    Military
    Côte d’lvoireXXXXXLocal Authorities and Social Security Fund
    Guinea-BissauXXXX
    KenyaXXXX
    Paymasters of each ministry
    X
    Exchequer
    National Social Security Fund
    MadagascarXXX
    MauritaniaXXXXX1. Public enterprises
    2. Regions
    NigerXXXX1. Sociétés d’Etat
    2. Collectivités
    SenegalXXXXX
    Treasury
    1. Quartermaster’s office
    2. Medical supply
    TogoX
    Et plan
    XXXX
    Trésorìer Payeur
    Autonomous organizations, annexed budgets, universities
    ZaïreXXXXX
    Each spending agency
    XState enterprises
    Module 5.Fiscal Reporting
    Type of ReportResponsibilityMain Aims of ReportsReport Received by
    CountryAccountingFiscalMinistriesFinanceExpenditure controlCash flow managementFiscal reviewTime LagMinistry of FinanceAuditCabinetHead of state
    BurundiXXXX
    (Department of Accounting)
    XX(Rapports mensuels du trimatrials)XX
    Central African Republic1. Monthly accounts
    2. Fiscal accounts
    Treasury accountsX
    (Treasury Budget Department) Fiscal Control Department
    XXXXX
    ChadMonthly accountsTreasuryXXX1–2 monthsXX
    Côte d’lvoire1. Monthly accounts
    2. Annual report
    TreasuryXX3 months
    3–5 months
    X
    X
    X
    X
    Guinea-BissauXXXXXXMonthly and quarterlyXXSecretariat of President
    Kenya1. Monthly accounts
    2. Fiscal accounts
    1. Exchequer compiles accounts weekly including external and internal debt reporting
    2. Limited fiscal reports
    Accounting units of ministriesXXXXNo time lagX
    (Exchequer office) Financial Secretary
    X
    X
    MadagascarXXXXXXX
    MauritaniaXXXXXXX
    NigerXXXXXXX
    Senegal1 Monthly accounts
    2. Annual accounts
    X
    Treasury
    X1. 2 months
    2. 1–2 years
    XX
    TogoXXPlanXXXXXX
    Zaïre1. Monthly
    2. Quarterly
    3. Semiannual
    4. Annual
    XXXXXXXXXX
    Module 6.Budget Administration and Decision Making
    Central AgenciesExecutiveLegislative
    CountryPlanning authorityMinistry of FinanceOtherBudget committeesCabinet or Council of MinistersLegislatureHead of state
    BurundiMinistry of PlanningXXXX
    (Before suspension in September 1967)
    X
    Central African RepublicMinistry of Planning, Economy and FinanceXXXX
    ChadMinistry of Planning (for preparing capital budget)Ministry of Finance (for preparing current budget and monitoring execution of both current and capital budgets)Central BankInterministerialCabinet adopts annual budgetHead of state approves annual budget
    Côte d’lvoreMinistry of Planning (for preparing Loi de Programme, which is list of projects by departments and source of financing and phasing of implementation)Ministry of Finance (for preparing current and capital budgets)1. Central Bank
    2. Casse Autonome d’Amortissement (CAA) (for foreign debt management)
    InterministerialCabinet reviews draft budgetNational Assembly reviews and adopts budgetHead of state approves annual budget
    Guinea-Bissau1. Ministry of Planning
    2. General Secretariat of the Presidential Office
    Ministry of FinanceAuditor General (Justice) Public Accounts Committee (Parliament)XParliament
    KenyaMinistry of Economic Planning and National DevelopmentMinistry of FinanceBank of KenyaXCabinet reviews draft budgetParliament approves budgetParliament signs annual budget
    MadagascarDirectorate of PlanningX
    Directorate of program review
    Central BankXXX
    In Council
    MauritaniaMinistry of Finance and EconomyX1. Central Bank
    2. Certain technical departments
    3. Presidency
    XX
    Military Council
    NigerMinistry of PlanningXXX
    SenegalMinistry of Planning and CooperationMinistry of FinanceRegional Central BankInterministerial CommitteeXParliament debates and approves budget by voteSigns budget
    TogoMinistry of PlanningMinistry of Economy and FinanceMinistry of Commerce and Transport Rural Development and IndustryXXX
    ZaïreMinistry of PlanningMinistry of FinanceInterministenal CommitteeXParliament debates and approves budget by voteSigns budget
    Module 7.Budget Classification
    Object ClassificationObject Classification
    RecurrentNonrecurrent (development)
    CurrantCapitalConstruction
    CountryWages and salariesGoods and servicesMaintenanceTransfers and subsidiesDebt serviceCapital itemsFinancial investmentCapitel transfersLand and property acquisitionsAssets and equipmentOther coateLine ItemFunctionalOrganizationalProgram
    BurundiXXXXXXXXXXX
    Central African RepublicXXXXXXXXXXX
    ChadFollowing GFS classification since 1987Chapter, means for financingXXX
    Cota d’IvoireXXX(Budget spécial d’investissement et d’équipement)XXX
    (Budget général de fonctionnement)
    Guinea-BissauXXXXXXXX(Land Is government property)XXXXX
    KenyaXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    MadagascarXXXXXXXXXXXX
    MauritaniaXXXXXXXXXX
    NigerXXXXXXXXX
    SenegalXXXXXXXXX
    (In capital items)
    XX X
    (investment budget)
    TogoXXXXXAmortissement de la dette en principalX
    ZaïreXXXXXXXXXXX

    GROUP IV

    Module 1.Macroeconomic Framework
    Basis and MethodologyUse of Material
    CountryAgencies ResponsibleMedium-term planForecasting modelsAlternative scenariosImpact analysisContingency reviewBudget guidancoBackground material
    Barbados1. Ministry of Finance
    2. Central Bank
    3. Economic Affairs (Prime Minister’s Office)
    Five-Year Development Plan No rolloverBroad macroeconomic framework with sectoral planning and compilation of public investment projectsLimitedXXX
    (Central Bank reports)
    Bolivia1. Ministry of Finance and Planning
    2. Central Bank
    (1) Under formulationXXX
    Chile1. Ministry of Finance
    2. Central Bank
    3. National Planning Secretarial
    Annual Investment PlanXXX
    DominicaMinistry of Finance and PlanningThree-year capitalSimple financialProject reviewsXX
    EcuadorNational Council for DevelopmentFive-Year PlanAggregate macroeconomic framework with sectoral planningXX
    Guyana1. Ministry of Finance
    2. Ministry of Planning and Development
    3. Guyana State Corporation
    Five-Year Plan (not operational); Public Investment Program (new)SimpleRevenues and balance of paymentsMonthly (proof) formal 6 monthsXX
    Haiti1. Ministry of Planning
    2. Ministry of Finance
    3. Central Bank
    No (Annual Plan); compilation of public investment programsXXX
    Jamaica1. National Planning Institute (NPI)
    2. Ministry of Finance
    3. Bank of Jamaica
    Three-Year rolling planBroad macroeconomic framework with sectoral planning compilation of public investment projectsYes, on different import levels, growth targets, public sector investmentXXX
    Mexico1. Secretariat of Programming and Budgeting
    2. Secretariat of Finance and Public Credits
    Five-Year PlanAggregate macroeconomic framework and sectoral planning with foreign ex-change planXXXXX
    Module 2.Budget Preparation and Planning Background
    Budget GuidellnesBudget Discussion/Appraisal*Manpower ControlDevelopment Plan
    CountryCellingPriceabcdefCoat AnalysisPersonnel administrationBudgetDurationAgencyMedium-Term Rolling PlanAnnual Plan
    BarbadosCelling on total wages and salaries and percentage ceiling on other expenditure itemsLimitedXXXXXCentral Purchasing Department provides cost inputs of goods and servicesEstablishment’s Department Service CommissionXFive-Year Plan1. Ministry of Finance
    2. Central Bank
    BoliviaXXXX
    ChileXXXX
    Projects
    Central Controller’s OfficeXNational Planning SecretariatAnnual investment
    DominicaXXXXLimited to agricultural projectsCapital projectsPersonnel DepartmentPersonal ServicesThree-Year PlanPlanningX
    EcuadorXXXXXXLimitedFive-Year Plan
    GuyanaXXXXX
    Ministries
    1. Cabinet
    2. Public Service Commission
    Ministry of FinanceFive-Year Plan (not operational)Ministry of Planning and DevelopmentAnnual PIP
    HaitlXNot specifiedXXXXLimitedMinistry of Public EmploymentXAnnualMinistry of PlanningAnnual Plan
    JamaicaFor inescapable commitments and government priorities deterred by CabinetOn previous fiscal year price basisXXXFor projectsCivil Service Commission Ministry of Public ServicesXThree-Year PlanNational Planning InstituteThree-Year rolling planBudget
    MexicoXXXXXXXSecretarial of Programming and Budget

    a = item-by-item; b = incremental; c = fixed celling; d = program and performance; e = priority listing; f = open-ended.

    Module 3.Budget Coverage
    Special FeaturesState Goverment/Local AuthoritiesPublic Enterprises
    CountryFiscal YearAnnexed to budgetExtrabudgdetaryIncluded in budgetSeparate budgetBudgetAnnexedIndependent
    BarbadosApril–MarchOnly post officeSpecial funds, training levy, and transport levyNo local govern mentTransfersPublic enterprises prepare own budgets with approval of parent ministries and to some extenl with approval of Ministry of Finance for transfers from central government and government- guaranteed loans
    BoliviaJanuary–DecemberXXX
    ChileJanuary–DecemberPublic enterprisesXX
    DominicaJuly–JuneXX
    EcuadorJanuary–DecemberSeveral tunds are in operationXX
    GuyanaJanuary–December1. Public debt
    2. Corporations
    3. Capital project profiles
    Transfers and subsidiesXTransfere and subsidiesX
    HaitiOctober–SeptemberAudit court and state universityMilitary outlays and foreign-financed expenditureXX
    Main ones
    X
    JamaicaApril–MarchFinancial statementCapital Development FundXTabled in Parliament with central government budget
    MexicoJanuary–DecemberXX
    Module 4.Financial Control
    Precommitment ControlCommitment AccountingIssue of Checks
    CountryFinanceTenders and otherMinistriesFinance (EDP)MinistryFinanceSelf-Accounting Units
    BarbadosMinistry of Finance requires all ministries to request special permission to purchase plant, equipment, and furnitureX
    Treasury issues checks
    Transport Levy Boards and NIF for special fund and training levies
    BoliviaXXXXXX
    ChileXXXXXX
    DominicaSelectMinistry of FinanceTo some extent for external transactionsX
    Treasury
    X
    EcuadorXSpending unitsXXPetty cashX
    GuyanaXMinistry of Planning and Development (capita) projects)Self-accounting ministriesX
    Accountant General
    Self-accounting ministries
    HaitiMinistry of FinanceXX
    Office of the Budget
    X
    For current accounts opened at commercial banks
    XLocal authorities and military
    JamaicaController General Office of Ministry of FinanceContracts Committee (consisting of technical, legal. and accounting personnel)X
    Through warrant system
    XX
    For public debt, salaries, pensions
    Housing Fund under Ministry of Construction
    MexicoXSecretariat of Trade Secretariat of Work and Settlement Sectorial Coordination UnitsXXOnly petty cashX
    Except legislative and decentralized enterprises
    Module 5.Fiscal Reporting
    Type of ReportResponasibilityMain Alms of Reporte Report Received by
    CountryAccountingFiscalMinistriesFinanceExpenditure controlCash flow managementFiscal reviewTime LagMinistry of FinanceAuditCabinetHead of state
    Barbados1. Monthly accounts of spending agencies1. Monthly financial statement of Treasury1. Spending agencies1. Treasury summary statementXXX21–30 daysXX
    2. Final accounts2. Final accounts2. TreasuryX30 daysXXX
    BoliviaMonthly accountsXXXXX
    Chile1. MonthlyXXAutonomous GeneralXX1. 3 weeksXXXX
    2. QuarterlyXComptroller’s Office2. 3 weeks
    3. AnnualX3. 2-monthly
    DominicaMonthly accountsXX2 weeksXX
    Ecuador1. Monthly
    2. Quarterly
    3. Annual accounts
    XXXXFor annual reports, 3 months; for others, 1 monthXX
    Guyana1. Monthly financial statements
    2. Monthly DPU reports
    3. Annual
    Quarterly reportsFor performance reports1. Accountant General
    2. DPU
    3. Central Bank and Planning
    XXX1. 11 days
    2. 11 days
    3. 3½ months
    X
    (and planning)
    XX
    Haiti1. Monthly accounts
    2. Final accounts
    1. Treasury (monthly compilation)
    2. Treasury
    XXXX
    Jamaica1. Monthly financial statements of each spending agency
    2. Consolidated appropriation accounts with balance sheet by Accountant General
    1. Ministries report on quarterly PSIP
    2. Accountant General prepares a consolidated fund statement
    X
    X

    X
    X

    X
    X
    1 year
    2 months
    2 months
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    Auditor General (Parliament)
    X
    Mexico1. Monthly accounts
    2. Bimonthly
    3. Quarterly accounts
    4. Annual accounts
    XXX
    Secretariat of Programming and Budget
    XXFor annual reports, 3 months; for others, 2 weeksXX
    Module 6.Budget Administration and Decision Making
    Central AgenciesExecutiveLegislative
    CountryPlanning authorityMinistry of FinanceOtherBudget committeesCabinet or Council of MinistersLegislatureHead of state
    BarbadosEconomic Affairs Division of Ministry of Finance, including Budget Administration DivisionCentral Bank and Establishment Department for Manpower Control and PlanningXXXGovernor General signs budget
    BoliviaMinistry of Finance and PlanningXXXX
    ChiteNational Planning SecretariatMinistry of FinanceCentral BankXCouncil ot GovernmentApproves
    DominicaMinistry of Finance and PlanningMinistry of Finance and PlanningXXXX
    EcuadorNational Council for Development (investment projects)Ministry of Finance (recurrent expenditure}XX
    Ad hoc coordinating committee
    XX
    GuyanaMinistry of Planning and DevelopmentMinistry of FinanceBank of Guyana Guyana State Corporation (public enterprises)Budget CommitteeXX
    HaitiMinistry of PlanningMinistry of FinanceCentral Bank, Ministry of Public EmploymentX
    Interministerial budget discussion
    XNational AssemblyApproves budget adopted by National Assembly
    JamaicaNational Planning InstituteMinistry of FinanceBank of Jamaica (balance of payments and monetary)XXStanding Finance Committee examines budget bill before approval by Parliament
    MexicoMinistry of FinanceX
    Module 7.Budget Classification
    Object Classification
    RecurrentNonrecurrent (development)
    CurrentCapitalConstructionObject Classification
    CountryWages and salariesGoods and servicesMaintenanceTransters and subsidiesDebt serviceCapital itemsFinancial invest mentCapital transfersLand and property acquisitionsAssets and equipmentOther costsLine itemFunctionalOrganizationalProgram
    BarbadosXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    BoliviaXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    ChileXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    DominicaXXXXXXXXXX
    EcuadorXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    GuyanaXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    HaitiX
    (In 8 main categories)
    XXXXIncluding reimbursement and social paymentsXXX
    JamaicaXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    Mixed with performance classification
    MexicoXXXXXXXXXXXXX

    GROUP V

    Module 1.Macroeconomic Framework
    Basis and MethodologyUse of Material
    CountryAgencies ResponsibleMedium-term planForecasting modelsAftemative scenariosImpact analysisContingency reviewBudget guidanceBackground material
    Austria1. Institute for Economic Research (WIFO)
    2. Federal Ministry of Finance
    X
    Four-year economic and financial forecasts
    1. Budget forecasts by Ministry of Finance (four-year basis)
    2. Medium-term investment program of Republic by Ministry of Finance
    3. Forecasting models of Institute of Advanced Studies
    Limited examination of budget impact on economyMinistry pi Finance wilhin context of advance to Minister of FinanceXX
    Belgium1. Ministry of Finance
    2. Ministry of Budget
    1. In urgent cases. Council of Ministers can authorize spending where existing appropriations are not sufficient or do not exist
    2. These decisions must be ratified by Parliament
    XX
    France1. Prime Minister’s Office
    2. National Planning Commission
    3. Minister of (Economy) and Finance and Budget
    Five-Year Economic PlanProjections of government expenditure covering three years with broad aggregatesXFinance Ministry within framework of supplementary Finance Act without requiring specific parliamentary authorizationXX
    Poland1. Planning Commission
    2. Ministry of Finance
    3. Central Bank
    1. Five-Year Economic Plan:
    2. Annual Han
    3. Credit Plan
    4. Balance of Payments Plan
    Sectoral analysisVariants in first stage. In implementation stage, plan targets not revisedSectoralRoutine reviews first quarterX
    partial
    X
    Turkey1. Prime Minister’s Office
    2. State Planning Organization (SPO)
    3. Ministry of Finance and Customs
    4. Undersecretariat of the Treasury and Foreign Trade (UTFT)
    5. Central Bank
    Five-Year Development Plan and annual programBroad macroeconomic Framework with sectoral planningAlternative growth scenarioMinistry of Finance and Customs within context of Reserve Fund and Investment Acceleration FundXX
    Module 2.Budget Preparation and Planning Background
    Budget GuidelinesBudget Discussion/Appraiser*Manpower ControlDeveloipment Plan
    CountryCeilingPriceabcdefCost AnalysisPersonnel administrationBudgetDurationAgencyMedium-Term Rolling PlanAnnual Plan
    AustriaXXXXXFor certain projectsXXCost/ benefit analysis lor certain projectsChancellory (Personnel Management Department)Federal Ministry of FinanceFour yearsInstitute tor Economic Research (WIFO)Four-year forecasting model
    BelgiumBudget targets Net treasury borrowing requirements (both as percentage of GNP)XXXXXWithin zero-based budgeting modelCivil Service Commission [Prime Minister’s office) Ministry of Public ServiceMinistry of Budget
    France1. Central government deficit not to exceed certain percentage of GDP
    2. Tax or social security burden should be lowered by specified percentage as determined by Government
    Current pricesXXOngoing and new expendituresXDirectorate of BudgetFive-Year PlanNational Planning Commission
    Poland1. Manpower limits
    2. Budgetary normatives
    3. Ceilings for inventories
    XXXProjects1. Council of Ministers
    2. Ministry of Wages end Social Affairs
    XFive-Year PlanPlanning CommissionAnnual financial plan is budget. Credit Plan covers development expenditure
    TurkeyWithin Five-Year Development Plan’s annual target ratios of total expenditure to GNP and corresponding real growth percentageXX1. State Personnel Organization
    2. La Cour des Compter (Auditor General)
    Ministry of Finance and Customs (Department of Budget and Fiscal Control)Five-Year PlanState Planning OrganizationAnnual Program (of State Planning Organization)

    a = item-by-item; b = incremental; c = fixed celling; d = program and performance; e = priority listing; f = open-ended.

    Module 3.Budget Coverage
    Special FeaturesState Goverment/Local AuthoritiesPublic Enterprises
    CountryFiscal YearAnnexed to budgetExtra budgetaryIncluded in budgetSeparate budgetBudgetAnnexedIndependent
    AustriaJanuary–DecemberX
    (State governments and municipalities)
    Budget includes:
    1. Post office
    2. Public transport
    3. National theaters
    4. National forests
    5. Federal Govemment
    BelgiumJanuary–DecemberXParliament has to approve budgets
    FranceJanuary–DecemberXX
    PolandJanuary–December30 percent of government finance being outside for
    (a) Funds (foreign debt servicing)
    (b) Special accounts
    Grants and transfersXTransfers and subsidiesX
    TurkeyJanuary–DecemberAnnexed budgetsLocal authoritiesX
    Municipalities
    Budget includes transfer paymentsX
    Slate economic enterprises
    Module 4.Financial Control
    Precommitment ControlCommitment AccountingIssue of Checks
    CountryFinanceTenders end otherMinistriesFinance (EDPjMinistryFinanceSelf-Accounting Units
    AustriaXXXX
    BelgiumXXXX
    FranceXX
    Technical ministries
    Directorate of the TreasuryXPost Office and annexed budget agencies Social secunty organization Local governments (municipalities)
    PolandXXXXExtrabudgetary units Public enterprises Cooperatives Defense Public safety
    TurkeyXX
    Auditor General’s Office for contracts
    XXXPension fund state economic enterprises, and autonomous organizations
    Module 5.Fiscal Reporting
    Type of ReportResponsibilityMain Aims of ReportsReport Received By
    CountryAccountingFiscalMinistriesFinanceExpenditure controlCash flow managementFiscal reviewTime LagMinistry of FinanceAuditCabinetHead of state
    Austria1. Monthly accounts
    2. Final accounts
    Overall quarterly summary1. Spending agencies1. Department of Finance
    2. Ministry of Finance
    X
    X
    X
    3 months
    X
    X
    1–2 days
    X
    XX
    Belgium1. Monthly accounts
    2. Final accounts
    1. Finance inspectors in each ministry
    2. Spending agencies (in principle)
    XXXXX
    France1. Weekly accounts
    2. Monthly accounts
    3. Final accounts
    Reports of Directorate of Public Accounts and Directorate of TreasuryMinistry of Finance (Director of Public Accounts)XXX1. 1 week
    2. 2 weeks
    3. 3 months
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    PolandState budget’s cumulative reports (March, June, July, Sept., Oct., Nov.)Three annual reports;
    1. State budget implementation (government presentation)
    2. Ditto, description volume
    3. Analytical
    Budget and Accountant GeneralX
    Research and economic analysis
    1. 3
    months
    2. 3 months
    3. 4 months
    XXXX
    Turkey1. Monthly accounts
    2. Final accounts
    Reports of State Planning Organization, UTFT, Research Board of Ministry of FinanceX
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    1. 2 months
    2. 6 months
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    Module 6.Budget Administration and Decision Making
    Central AgenciesExecutiveLegislative
    CountryPlanning authorityMinistry of FinanceOtherBudget committeesCabinet or Council of MinistersLegislatureHead of state
    AustriaInstitute for Economic Research—WIFOFederal Ministry of FinanceCouncil of Ministers reviews estimate before submission to ParliamentParliament approves annual budget by law (annual financial act)
    Belgium1. Ministry of Finance
    2. Ministry of Budget (Department of Budget)
    1. Commission on orientation and coordination of public market (capital projects including associated three-year cost estimates)
    2. Superior Council of Finances (financial and tax policies)
    Cabinet approves budget bill before submission to ParliamentParliament votes state budget
    FranceNational Planning Commission1. Ministry of Economy and Finance and Budget
    2. (Deputy) Minister of Budget
    1. Deputy Minister of Foreign Trade
    2. Deputy Minister of Commerce and Artisanat
    XCouncil of MinistersParliament approves annual Finance ActPresident signs budget law
    PolandPlanning CommissionMinistry of FinanceCentral BankXX
    TurkeyState Planning OrganizationMinistry of Finance and Customs1. Undersecretariat of the Treasury and Foreign Trade
    2. Central Bank
    High Planning CouncilPrime Minister’s OfficeNational Assembly approves budget by enacting a lawPresident signs budget law
    Module 7.Budget Classification
    Object Classification
    RecurrentNonrecurrent (development)
    CurrantCapitalConstructionObject Classification
    CountryWages and salariesGoods and servicesMaintenanceTransfers and subsidiesDebt serviceCapital itemsFinancial investmentCapital transfersLand and property acquisitionsAssets and equipmentOther costsLine itemFunctionalOrganizationalProgram
    AustriaXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    BelgiumXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    FranceXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    PolandXXXX
    Credit Plan
    X
    Limited Credit Plan
    Credit PlanXXXX
    TurkeyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    Appendix II Government Accounting: Recent Developments and Future Directions

    Government accounting has traditionally been viewed as a system of recording the financial transactions of public authorities and, thus, of their receipts (revenues and proceeds from borrowing) and expenditures. In turn, the system was expected to assure the community and its legislative instruments about the custody of the moneys received and the pattern of their utilization. Consequently, the primary concerns were to ensure the comprehensiveness of the records of public authorities and the adequacy of the process of receiving and paying public moneys. Added to these twin concerns, which dominated government accounting for a number of years, were arrangements in which accounts were also considered important, indeed vital, for formulating and implementing government budgets. Accounting systems were therefore expanded and given additional tasks in preparing the budget of each agency, consolidating the budget for the government as a whole, and assisting the bodies charged with the responsibility for budget approval by providing information on available resources, existing liabilities, costs of operations, and related performance.

    These tasks have grown immensely over the years and become more complex, reflecting the growth and complexity of government operations. In experiencing the growth in tasks and responsibilities, attention to the second set of activities has also increased substantially. The first set of activities (the receipt and payment of public moneys) has also undergone massive transformation, not so much in the coverage or the content of records maintained for the purpose, but in the way in which receipts were collected and payments made. These aspects were less transformed by internal organizational factors than by developments outside government accounting: the development of commercial banking and its gradual extension into rural areas and the establishment of a well-organized network of banking centers forged a new and vibrant relationship between governments and the banking system, regardless of its ownership. This relationship in turn brought a change in the operations of the treasury, which was considered the central point of government operations. The treasury became more an accounting agency than an agency for the custody of moneys and their disbursement.

    In the last two decades, the growth of computer technology and the introduction of on-line operational systems changed the maintenance of government accounting records immensely. This technological development has provided an easier and quicker electronic trail of all transactions, from their inception to their completion, and thus facilitated a continuous oversight into the activities of public bodies. The steady advances in the technology have enabled the introduction of the electronic transfer of moneys and payments both into and out of the government. These advances are not the subject of this appendix, however; the focus here is on the second area described above.

    Evolution

    Two parameters have influenced the evolution of the government accounting system over the years: the nature and content of accountability and the agencies or institutions from which accountability was expected. Neither has been or can be considered on its own. It is a case of mutual reinforcement, where developments in one area have opened new vistas in the other.

    Accountability has been variously defined, depending on the situation. It has been equated with governance in some cases, while in others its scope has been relatively narrow and restricted to providing information on the status of the appropriations voted by the legislature, amounts spent by the agencies, and, sometimes, the liabilities incurred by the agencies. It was thus essentially a case of financial disclosure. But the content and form of financial disclosure have changed a good deal, as will be illustrated later. Each stage of this change was influenced by two factors—the changes in the financial transactions of the government’, and the experimentation carried out in the commercial sector to improve the extent of financial disclosure for the shareholders of companies. In addition, as a spillover effect of performance budgeting on the one hand and the frequent demands for improved public expenditure management on the other, the scope of accountability has expanded to include not merely responsibility for the prudent management of finances but also responsibility for action and for the delivery of services and results within the constraints of time and the financial resources specified as part of the annual budget.

    Accounting was expected to function so as to meet the purposes of three broad types of institutions: the common man (who may not necessarily be a taxpayer but may only be a beneficiary of the public goods provided by the public authorities); the legislature or its proxy; and the internal management within the government itself. As a result of assiduous efforts over the years, greater clarity has been provided about the broad needs of each of these groups. Thus, as will be illustrated below, the common man, who hitherto had been an unspecified abstraction with vague interests seeking to be defined, has been given a form, substance, and stratification. It is now recognized that the common man hitherto represented a conglomeration of different interests. A major advance in recent years has been the formulation of stratified groups of people with different interests. Therefore, information on the financial status of governments had to be provided so as to meet the heterogeneous requirements of these different groups.

    The interests of the legislature (including those in the former centrally planned economies) have also become more varied. In addition to the status of the appropriations and year-end status of government finances in general, the legislature has come to demand and obtain regular information on the future financial implications of current policies, as well as on the contingent liabilities of the nation. Also, its desire for more frequent information on the status of government finances had to be accommodated. Indeed, regardless of the actual utilization of the information, its regular provision throughout the fiscal year has acquired an enduring place in the functioning of parliamentary democracies.

    Management in government has also become more specific and concrete. It now combines the different but complementary groups of central agencies (primarily responsible for the macroeconomic management of the country) and the numerous spending agencies (responsible for micro-management of the tasks and finances entrusted to them). The central agencies primarily needed accounting information that facilitates the tracking of the calibrated fiscal policies while broadly serving the associated purposes of resource use planning and implementation. In addition, accounting systems have been called upon to provide information on the status of physical and financial assets, data on contingent liabilities and post-employment benefits of civil services, and a comparative assessment of the advantages of contracting out government services. The spending agencies needed improved accounting systems that facilitated budget formulation, cost and related expenditure control, cash management to reduce the overall borrowing costs of governments, asset management, and management of contingent liabilities. In addition, the traditional area of payment controls also had to be properly maintained.

    Issues

    In all the above areas, awareness had increased—either through self-realization or an improved knowledge of the practices in the commercial sector—of the limitations of the traditional cash-based systems in government. They were proving inadequate to reflect the costs of government operations or the continuing or contingent liabilities, and the important issue became the extent to which the commercial format, particularly accrual-based accounting, should be applied to the government.

    This issue, which had been in the forefront for nearly four decades since the incisive analysis of the Crick Committee on the form of accounts in the United Kingdom was published, had continually spurred public debate.1 By 1968, however, it appeared that the debate had been satisfactorily resolved with the acceptance of the recommendations of the President’s Budget Commission in the United States for the introduction of an accrual type of accounting in government. But the recommendation took more than two decades to be implemented, while the modalities of such a system were worked out.

    The introduction of the accrual-based commercial accounting system has now become obligatory in the Governments of New Zealand and the United States.2 But the scope of accrual accounting has been extended, and several concepts, such as depreciation, have been clarified and clearly delineated in their applications to government. The current issues are therefore the following: (1) Will the ongoing conversion to accrual and the commercial type of accounting provide adequate accountability to the legislature and the public at large? (2) Will it facilitate macroeconomic management by contributing more effectively to the formulation of appropriately calibrated fiscal policies and their implementation with minimal fiscal slippages? (3) If new accounting standards are to be introduced in governments, who should be responsible for their formulation and periodic monitoring to ensure full compliance?

    The various aspects of government accounting in the current context are analyzed below in terms of four modules: financial disclosure; accountability and fiscal reporting; macroeconomic management; and monitoring government accounting.

    Financial Disclosure

    The form of government accounts is determined primarily by the needs of the users. These users have traditionally been identified as the legislature and management within the government. (The latter is still identified as a single group for most purposes, although the demands or the requirements of central agencies and macroeconomic management tend to be different after a point, not so much in substance as in form.) The needs of the legislature were to know the justification for raising the resources and the purposes for which they were used. But as the operations of government became increasingly complex, it was also evident that the accounting information, compiled on a cash basis and limited to a year, was not adequate to disclose fully the current and probable costs of operating and investment decisions, nor did it fully reflect the efficiency of the management of programs. The twin purposes of government accounting.—accountability and internal management—were therefore both found to be wanting. Also, it was implicitly recognized that the time frame of accounting was not adequate to reflect interperiod or intergenerational equity, which was intended to permit an evaluation of the government’s ability to live within its means—not merely within one year of the term of office—but from one generation to another. The responses to these identified deficiencies were improved accounting that permits full financial disclosure and evaluation of actual performance.

    Government accounting broadly has a twofold approach: (1) budgetary or appropriation accounting that keeps track of the budgetary authority, and amounts voted and spent, etc. (in obligational accounting it records the obligations incurred, and correspondingly, in the cash systems, commitments are recorded); and (2) a cash basis of accounting that recognizes a transaction only when cash is received or disbursed.3 While budgetary and appropriation accounting continues even under the new systems, the changes brought about through the introduction of accrual accounting have primarily been in the following areas: (a) the concept of accrual; (b) the agency as the principal focus; and (c) the forms of annual financial statements furnished by each agency.

    Accrual accounting was traditionally interpreted in terms of actual receipt of goods and services received by the government and their use in the programs and delivery of services by government or public bodies. Under the specifications in use, the concept has been extended beyond goods and services to include all events—transactions and circumstances with financial effects on government—regardless of when cash is received or paid.4 However, the use of accrued expenses continues, as before, in the computation of program costs.

    The pivot of the above type of accrual accounting is the government agency (a department or any other administrative apparatus given the status of an agency), although in accounting it is called an “entity.” The financial disclosure will therefore concentrate on measuring the financial resources and funded liabilities of the entity. The transactions of these entities are expected to be arranged so as to meet the financial disclosure as well as the budgetary requirements.

    Each agency is viewed as a separate entity with its own accounts broadly comparable to a commercial firm. The intent is to have accounts in a form that would facilitate the application of a market-value approach in measuring the finances of that entity. Thus, a distinction is made between the financial resources and the funded liabilities of the entity. The former includes the cash resources, accounts receivable, loans receivable, interest receivable, investments, and inventories. The latter includes accounts payable, other funded liabilities, interest payable, other borrowings, and liability for loan guarantee losses. The format envisages the computation of “net financial resources” of the entity, which are defined as total financial resources minus total funded liabilities, the latter being liabilities for which budgetary authority has been received. The net financial resources seek to provide an idea of the balance (or the lack of it and the extent) between funded liabilities and the financial resources of the entity that have accumulated as a result of past policies of the executive and the legislature. This format is complemented by other statements that show the financial position and budgetary appropriations status. In the United States, for example, each agency is required to submit four principal statements: statement of financial position; statement of operations and changes in net position; statement of cash flows; and statement of budget and actual expenses.5 The primary feature of this approach is that it seeks to facilitate a more realistic assessment of government finances through a specific and explicit delineation of pension and debt liabilities, imputed interest subsidy in the lending operations of government, contingent liabilities, inventories, and asset management—all aspects that are generally concealed in a cash-based exercise.

    The accounts so prepared tend to be different from the budget. In obligation-based appropriation systems, the fund balances with the treasury would include unspent amounts of the budgetary authority already approved. In other systems with annual lapsability of funds (along with the budget), the statements primarily highlight the continuing financial liabilities for which funds have to be appropriated. They also show the future financial implications of current financial policies, or the draft of the current policies on future resources—a feature that is associated with rolling expenditure planning. To that extent, the accounting statements complement the rolling budget exercise, which is usually done for a period of three years in addition to the next budget year. Moreover, inasmuch as the accounting statements make a distinction between current liabilities and assets, it would be introducing a capital account also. In the United States, this could mean a different practice from the budget, which has no separate presentation of the capital budget.6

    Although the above systems are in their infancy, and fully acceptable standards are being developed on the calculation of medium-term liabilities, such as pensions, or the element of subsidy in the loans extended and the rate of interest charged by governments, their ability to highlight the inherent imbalance between resources available and expanding liabilities provide new instruments for those engaged in expenditure management. In contrast to the language of line-item appropriations used previously, the legislatures would now have to look at finances and at their own role as a judicious exercise in the asset and liability management of the nation. The preparation of the four types of statements referred to earlier is also bound to contribute to substantial additional work pressures. Developments in computer technology and the availability of improved software would go a long way toward mitigating these additional work burdens, however.

    Accountability and Fiscal Reporting

    As noted at the outset, because of the heterogeneous users and their interests, the concept of accountability had to be made more concrete. While the form of the accounts described in the preceding section has certainly been an improvement over previous practices, the effort in recent years to identify and categorize the users has been another notable improvement. The joint study of Canada and the United States (United States, General Accounting Office, 1986) identified six groups of users of government accounts. These were (1) legislators; (2) citizens; (3) media; (4) policy analysts; (5) corporate users and lenders; and (6) security dealers, etc. These six groups were then reorganized into three sets with overlapping interests: (i) legislators and government managers; (ii) citizens and corporations; and (iii) media and analysts. The first group is mainly responsible for the design and flow of information for other users. The second set primarily represents the beneficiaries, including those with investment interests in government securities, while the third set is concerned with analyzing and disseminating information.7 An important feature of this grouping is the explicit recognition of investors and creditors as a major category—a long overdue step, given the steady increase in the overall debt of public authorities.

    The second development has been the specification of the broad purposes of fiscal reporting that in turn facilitate the achievement of accountability. As is to be expected, the traditional objective of periodically providing information on the financial results of the legally approved budget continues to be dominant. In addition, it is now explicitly recognized that such information should permit an assessment of the financial condition and results of operations and an evaluation of efficiency and effectiveness. In turn, reports are expected to have six characteristics: (1) understandability—the need to be expressed simply—to make the information more accessible to the common man; (2) reliability—the data presented are to be verifiable; (3) relevance—to have a logical relationship between the purpose and the information provided; (4) timeliness—to be provided with minimum delay after completion of the event; (5) consistency—data are to be consistent over time; and (6) comparability—to facilitate comparisons among governments.

    Progress in achieving these objectives is spotty, however. The proposed framework of an accrual-based commercial format would go a long way to meet the requirements of the three sets of users identified. It is presumed that even the common man would have a better appreciation of the status of government through the balance sheet. But the publication of balance sheet formats still has to be implemented, although a few governments are taking steps in this direction. Meanwhile, greater attention is being given to the needs of investors and creditors. In addition to the regular publication of data by international financial institutions on the external debt and their credit rating by private sector firms, governments now routinely publish more information, more frequently than before, on the means of financing budget deficits and securities issued.8

    Progress is still needed in compiling accounting information that would permit evaluation or cross-governmental comparison. Evaluation, where practiced, is largely carried out through the value-for-money audits, and the related evaluation of selected programs, by the audit agencies. In some cases, evaluation is undertaken by the agencies themselves, but the results are not generally available to the public. Similarly, except for the data published by international financial institutions, little is available to permit comparison of government at various levels in a country, or in a region, or on an international basis. It is to be hoped that more progress will be made in these areas in the future.

    Macroeconomic Management

    Accounting, as a system responsible for providing credible information in a timely fashion to those responsible for making decisions and as a catalyst facilitating the formulation of decisions, has become more important in the context of macroeconomic management of countries. Economic management relies considerably on the formulation of precise targets as part of fiscal policies, and any major fiscal slippages from the scheduled targets are likely to have an adverse impact on the country. This scrupulous adherence to objectives and targets has brought accounting to the central stage of government management and endowed it with a dynamic role. Increasingly, this role is performed in three major ways: through improved fiscal reporting; strengthened cash management; and computation and containment of costs of programs and projects.

    Fiscal reporting, in addition to providing accountability through widespread dissemination of financial data, serves the equally important purpose of internal management within the executive branch of government. It provides information on the aggregates of revenues and expenditures to the central agencies and more detailed data to the operational agencies for operational purposes. In most countries now, sophisticated computer systems are used to record data, to operate them on-line, and to reconcile them with the data provided by the banking systems. Such on-line systems also provide detailed updated information and the profiles of all important projects to the planning authorities. These systems track events from approval of the budget to the various stages of commitment, delivery of services, and issue of checks and payments. Thus, they provide data not only on the actual cash amounts paid but also on the status of liabilities awaiting eradication. In addition, separate but complementary networks of information on payroll and pensions, debt management, foreign aid, and contingent liabilities alert the expenditure manager to the prospect of fiscal slippages and the extent of policy and administrative maneuverability inherent in the situation to enable him to avoid the slippages. These computerized systems, which are fairly common among countries, have contributed in three important ways to economic management.

    First, the scope of accounting has widened to include the reporting of physical progress in projects. Data merely on payments would serve only a narrow purpose, but the broader requirements of management include information on physical progress to ensure continuing congruence between financial and physical aspects. Such information on the physical progress is now a routine feature of project reporting. Second, the systems have narrowed the traditional gulf between central and spending agencies and have changed the patterns of controls by providing simultaneous access to fiscal data. A common feature of the systems until now has been for the central agencies to demand information from the spending agencies and, thereby, a dependence on the spending agencies also developed. The spending agencies in turn often delayed furnishing the information, or even doctored the data to suit their point of view. The computerized systems avoid these problems by providing even access to the information available in the computer. Third, the introduction of the on-line systems has also made the issue of the choice between centralized and decentralized payment systems somewhat academic. Indeed, more than half of government expenditures are now paid out on a centralized basis (pay, pensions, debt, and subsidies) without any loss of control and related efficiency.

    The necessity to adhere to budgetary targets has also contributed to placing more emphasis on cash management. Cash management has come to be used as a shorthand expression for achieving greater congruence between inflows and outflows, while avoiding the immobilization of funds and minimizing costs of borrowing that would otherwise be incurred. Traditionally, most accounting systems were primarily concerned with payments, as there was a prevailing belief that shortages in resources would be routinely funded through overdrafts or the issue of securities by the central bank. But the pursuit of calibrated fiscal policies involves compliance with limits on credit to the government from the banking system. Such limits assume greater importance where the budget deficit is already substantial, requiring every effort to sustain the fragile balance between inflows and outflows. Successful cash management requires a steady monitoring of the flows, while being vigilant about such time bombs as contingent liabilities. This type of improved monitoring and cash management is now an integral part of payment systems and thus of government accounting.

    Macroeconomic management in its broader form also requires efficient and economic use of resources. This implies the computation of costs of programs and efforts to contain them at the stipulated levels. Much of the debate in accounting over the last three decades centered on the appropriate choice of the basis for the computation of costs—accrual or cash. While costs should ideally reflect the accrued use of resources and should therefore be on an accrual basis, there can be approximations to those costs in a cash-based system. Thus, for short-term purposes, reliance is placed on the operational or running costs of programs as an instrument of control. Under this approach, the expenditure profiles (excluding capital outlays) of major programs are computed, and ceilings are specified for each program as part of the annual budget. The spending agencies are then obliged to observe those limits, while being responsible for the delivery of services within the specified performance framework. In some cases, the central agencies also specify the extent of monetary savings to be achieved within those ceilings. But in the spirit of organized management, the spending agencies are given administrative flexibility regarding the use of funds appropriated for the program. These practices, which are becoming common among a spectrum of industrial countries, illustrate the use of accounting in the computation and containment of program costs.

    Monitoring Accounting Standards

    The general responsibility for prescribing the form and content of accounts—the accounting charter—has been (and continues to be in several countries) located in the government itself. Although legislatures were endowed with the task of finally approving the accounting forms and basis, there is no experience of legislatures changing the proposals of the executive or the general accounting offices. But over the years it had been felt that this was contributing to an “inbred” view, uninfluenced by external developments. This feeling, together with the urgent need to make accountability more substantive, had contributed to the formation of autonomous accounting boards. These boards—to be found in Australia, New Zealand, and the United States—include representatives of the accounting profession and those that generate government accounts, as well as those that tend to benefit from the financial data published by governments. The boards, which can only function in an advisory capacity, have been very influential and have proved to be the primary impetus for the recent reforms. While the tasks of the boards have largely been facilitated by the growth of an electronically processed information industry, their endeavors have contributed to applying improved concepts to government operations. It could also be argued that the spread of autonomous, well-represented organizations may have proved useful in checking the traditional proclivity of some organizations within governments to defend the status quo.

    The contributions of the autonomous boards have so far been limited to formulating accounting standards. An area that remains to be explored is the monitoring of performance indicators/measurements and the standards of evaluation within the governments. As pointed out earlier, accountability is being interpreted in larger terms and its scope includes accountability for performance. Governments have therefore in recent years tried to formulate and publish performance indicators. But these indicators are largely formulated by those administratively responsible for programs, and the allegation about the use of self-serving indicators cannot therefore be entirely ignored. Also, the evaluation undertaken by the audit agencies has been selective, and their results do not appear to have had a major impact on how governmental organizations think, plan, and act. The formulation and implementation of standards for performance indicators and for program evaluation is a major area in which substantial progress is still awaited.

    Bibliography

      Adanolekun,Ladipo, “Institutional Perspectives on Africa’s Development Crisis,”International Journal of Public Sector Management (1991).

      Allison,Graham T., Jr., “Public and Private Management, Are They Fundamentally Alike in All Unimportant Respects?” in Current Issues in Public Administration, ed. by FrederickS.Lane (ed) (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1982), pp. 1333.

      Anshen,Melvin, “The Federal Budget as an Instrument for Management and Analysis,” in Program Budgeting: Program Analysis and Federal Budget, ed. by DavidNovick (ed) (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1965), pp. 323.

      Anthony,Robert N.,Planning and Control Systems: A Framework for Analysis (Boston: Harvard University, Graduate School of Business Administration, 1965).

      Anthony,Robert N.,The Management Control Function (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1988).

      Arab Organization of Administrative Services, The Unified Government Accounting System for Arab Countries (Cairo, 1980).

      Arkadie,Brian van, “The Role of Institutions in Development,” in Proceedings of the World Bank Annual Conference on Development Economics (Washington, 1989), pp. 15391.

      Artis,Michael, and Sylvia Ostry,International Economic Policy Coordination, Chatham House Papers No. 30, Royal Institute of International Affairs (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986).

      Ascher,Kate,The Politics of Privatization: Contracting Out Public Services (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1987).

      Ball,Ian (1990a), “Financial Management Reform of New Zealand’s Public Sector: The Treasury’s Role” (New Zealand: The Treasury, 1990).

      Ball,Ian (1990b), “Financial Management Reform of New Zealand’s Public Sector” (New Zealand: The Treasury, 1990).

      Behn,Robert D., “Leadership for Cut-Back Management: The Use of Corporate Strategy,”Public Administration Review (November/December1980).

      Bery, K., “Economic Policy Reform in Developing Countries: The Role and Management of Political Factors,”World Development, Vol. 18 (August1990), pp. 112331.

      Bhatia,Rattan J.,The West African Monetary Union: An Analytical Review, Occasional Paper 35 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1985).

      Boum,John., “Helping the Nation Spend Wisely,”International journal of Government Auditing (October1989), pp. 1 and 6.

      Break,George F.,Federal Lending and Economic Stability (Washington: Brookings Institution, 1965).

      Brewer,John,The Sinews of Power: War, Money and the English State, 1688–1783 (New York: Knopf, 1989).

      Bryant,Ralph, and others, (ed)eds., Macroeconomic Policies in an Interdependent World, Brookings Institution, Center for Economic Policy Research, and International Monetary Fund (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1989).

      Buchanan,James M.,Fiscal Theory and Political Economy: Selected Essays (Chapel Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, 1960).

      Burns, James M.,Leadership (New York: Harper & Row, 1979).

      Campbell,Harrison S., “Procurement and Management of Spares,” inDefense Management, ed. by StephenEnke (ed) (New York: Prentice-Hall, 1967), pp. 187229.

      Canada, Auditor General of Canada, Constraints to Productive Management in the Public Service (Ottawa, 1983).

      Canada, Auditor General of Canada, Well-Performing Organizations (Ottawa, 1988).

      Canada, Auditor General of Canada, Values, Service and Performance (Ottawa, 1990).

      Canada, Auditor General of Canada, The Treasury Board, Guide on the Program Evaluation Function (Ottawa, 1981).

      Canetti,Elias,Crowds and Power, translated by CarolStewart (New York: Continuum, 1981).

      The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy, Cash Limits in Operation (London, 1982).

      Chaudhuri, K.N.,Asia Before Europe: Economy and Civilization of the Indian Ocean from the Rise of Islam to 1750 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).

      Danziger,James N., and Peter Smith Ring, “Fiscal Limitations: A Selective Review of Recent Research,”Public Administration Review (January/February1982).

      Dean,Peter N., and Cedric Pugh,Government Budgeting in Developing Countries (London: Routledge, 1989).

      Deming, W.Edwards,Out of the Crisis (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1986).

      Devons,Ely,Planning in Practice: Essays in Aircraft Planning in Wartime (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1950).

      Diamond,Jack, “Measuring Efficiency in Government: Techniques and Experience,” in Government Financial Management, ed. by A.Premchand (ed) (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990).

      Dixit, Avinash K., and BarryNalebuff,Thinking Strategically: The Competitive Edge in Business, Politics, and Everyday Life (New York: Norton, 1991).

      Donahue, John D.,The Privatization Decision: Public Ends, Private Means (New York: Basic Books, 1989).

      Dopson, Sue, and RosemaryStewart, “Public and Private Sector Management: The Case for a Wider Debate,”Public Money and Management, Vol. 10 (Spring1990).

      Douglas, Patricia P., and Robert N.Anthony, “An Analysis of the Government Accounting Model,”The Government Accountant’s Journal (Summer1991), pp. 2534.

      Drucker,Peter F., “The Deadly Sins in Public Administration,” in Current Issues in Public Administration, ed. by Frederick S.Lane (ed) (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1982).

      Drucker,Peter F.,, The New Realities; in Government and Politics, in Economics and Business, in Society and World View (New York: Harper & Row, 1989).

      Durham,Paul, (ed)ed., Output and Performance Measurement in Central Government: Some Practical Achievements (London: H.M. Treasury, 1987).

      Dye,Kenneth M., “Value for Money: Toward Improved Organizational Functioning,” in Government Financial Management, ed. by A.Premchand (ed) (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990).

      Eden,Colin, and Chris. Huxham, “Action-Oriented Strategic Management,”Journal of Operational Research Society, Vol. 39, No. 10 (1988), pp. 88999.

      Enke,Stephen,Defense Management (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1967).

      Fisher,Stanley, and Alan Gelb, “Issues in the Reform of Socialist Economies,” in Reforming Central and Eastern European Economies, ed. by VittorioCorbo, FabrizioCoricelli, and JanBossak (ed) (Washington: World Bank, 1991), pp. 6583.

      Fox,Ronald J., and James L.Field,The Defense Management Challenge: Weapons Acquisition (Boston: Harvard Business School, 1988).

      Fukuyama,Francis,The End of History and the Last Man (New York: The Free Press, 1992).

      Germany, Federal Ministry of Finance, Federal German Budget Legislation (Bonn, 1988).

      Goode,Richard,Government Finance in Developing Countries (Washington: The Brookings Institution, 1984).

      Grace,Peter J. (Chairman), War on Waste, President’s Private Sector Survey on Cost Control (New York: Macmillan, 1984).

      Granick,David,Chinese State Enterprise: A Regional Property Rights Analysis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990).

      Gunn, L., “Public Management: A Third Approach?”Public Money and Management, Vol. 8 (Spring/Summer1988), pp. 2125.

      Hage,Jerald, and Kurt Finsterbusch,Organizational Change as a Development Strategy: Models and Tactics for Improving Third World Organizations (Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner, 1987).

      Hage,Jerald, and Kurt Finsterbusch, “Three Strategies of Organizational Development, Organizational Theory and Organizational Design,”International Review of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 55 (1989), pp. 2957.

      Hartle,Douglas G.,The Expenditure Budget Process of the Government of Canada: A Public Choice—Rent-Seeking Perspective (Toronto: Canadian Tax Foundation, 1988).

      Hayek,Friedrich A. von,The Constitution of Liberty (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960).

      Heald,David, “The Political Implications of Redefining Public Expenditure in the United Kingdom,”Political Studies (1991), pp. 7599.

      Healey,Denis,The Time of My Life (London: Michael Joseph, 1989).

      Heymann,David B., “Input Controls in the Public Sector: What Does Economic Theory Offer?”IMF Working Paper No. 59 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1988).

      Hiromoto,Toshiro, “Another Hidden Edge—Japanese Management Accounting,”Harvard Business Review, Vol. 66 (July-August1988), pp. 2226.

      Home,Jocelyn, and Paul R. Masson, “Scope and Limits of International Economic Cooperation and Policy Coordination,”Staff Papers, International Monetary Fund, Vol. 35 (June1988), pp. 25984.

      Hyde,Albert C.,ed., Government Budgeting, Theory, Process, Politics (Pacific Grove, California: Brooks/Cole, 1992).

      International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook, May 1992 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1992).

      International Monetary Fund, The World Bank, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, The Economy of the U.S.S.R. (Washington: World Bank, 1990).

      International Monetary Fund, A Study of the Soviet Economy, 3 vols. (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1991).

      Jackson, P.M., “Economics of Public Services: Public Choice and Public Sector Management,”Public Money and Management, Vol. 10 (Winter1990), pp. 1320.

      Jackson,Peter, and Bob Palmer,First Steps in Measuring Performance in the Public Sector: A Management Guide (London: Public Finance Foundation, 1989).

      Kapur,Ishan,Michael T.Hadjimichael,Paul Hilbers, JeraldSchiff, and PhilippeSzymczak,Ghana: Adjustment and Growth, 1983–91, Occasional Paper 86 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1991).

      Keating,Michael, and DavidRosalky, “Rolling Expenditure Plans: Australian Experience and Prognosis,” in Government Financial Management, ed. by A.Premchand (ed) (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990).

      Keeling,Desmond,Management in Government (London: Allen & Unwin, 1972).

      Kelman,Steven,Procurement and Public Management (Washington: American Enterprise Institute Press, 1990).

      Kline, Bennett E., and Norman H.Martin, “Freedom, Authority and Decentralization,”Harvard Business Review, Vol. 36 (May-June1958), pp. 6975.

      Korff,Hans Clausen, “Planning and Budgeting in the Federal Republic of Germany,” in Comparative International Budgeting and Finance, ed. by A.Premchand and JesseBurkhead (ed) (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Books, 1984), pp. 3953.

      Kraqan, D.J., “Towards More Flexibility of Government Expenditure: Some Recent Developments in the Netherlands,”Policy Sciences, No. 17 (1984), pp. 41327.

      Leonard,David K., “The Political Realities of African Management,”World Development, Vol. 15 (July1987), pp. 899910.

      Levine,Charles H., “Organizational Decline and Cutback Management,”Public Administration Review (July/August1978), pp. 33316325.

      Lewis,Verne B., “Reflections on Budget Systems,”Public Budgeting and Finance, Vol. 8 (Spring1988), pp. 419.

      Lewis, W.Arthur,The Theory of Economic Growth (London: Allen & Unwin, 1955).

      Likierman,Andrew, “Government Accounting in the United Kingdom,” in Government Financial Management, ed. by A.Premchand (ed) (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990), pp. 307325.

      Likierman,Andrew, and AlisonTaylor,Government’s New Departmental Reports: Challenges and Potential Problems (London: Certified Accountants Publications Ltd., 1990).

      Lindblom,Charles E., “Decision-Making in Taxation and Expenditures,” in Public Finances; Needs, Sources and Utilization, ed. by James M.Buchanan (ed) (Princeton, New Jersey: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1961), pp. 295336.

      Lynn,Jonathan, and Anthony Jay, (ed)ed., The Complete Yes Minister (London: British Broadcasting Corporation, 1984).

      McCaffery,Jerry, “Canada’s Envelope Budget: A Strategic Management System,”Public Administration Review (July/August1984), pp. 31623.

      Mack,Ruth P.,Planning in Uncertainty—Decision Making in Business and Government Administration (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1970).

      Macmullen,Ramsay,Corruption and the Decline of Rome (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1988).

      Math,Paul, “Acquisition Reform: Three Guiding Principles,”The G.A.O. Journal, No. 7 (Fall1989).

      Mautz, R.K., “Generally Accepted Principles,”Public Budgeting and Finance (Winter1991), pp. 311.

      Metcalfe,Les, and Sue Richards,Improving Public Management (London: Sage Publications, 1987).

      Miah,Nuruz Zaman, “Attempts at Developing a Conceptual Framework for Public Sector Accounting in New Zealand,”Financial Accountability and Management, Vol. 7 (Summer1991), pp. 8397.

      Montgomery,John D., “Probing Managerial Behavior: Image and Reality in Southern Africa,”World Development, Vol. 15, No. 7 (1987), pp. 91129.

      Mosley,Paul,Jane Harrigan, and John Toye,Aid and Power: The World Bank and Policy-Based Lending, 2 vols. (London; New York: Routledge, 1991).

      Mowl,Colin, and Philippa Todd,Central Government Funds and Accounts and the Central Government Borrowing Requirement (London: H.M. Treasury, 1990).

      Nader,Ralph, “Run the Government Like the Best American Corporations,”Harvard Business Review, Vol. 66 (November-December1988), pp. 8186.

      New Zealand, The Public Finance Act (Wellington: Government Printing Works, 1989).

      New Zealand, Putting It Simply—An Explanatory Guide to Financial Management Reform (Wellington: The Treasury, 1990).

      Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, The Control and Management of Government Expenditure (Paris, 1987).

      Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Public Management Developments, Survey 1990 (Paris, 1990).

      Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Accounting Reform in Central and Eastern Europe (Paris, 1991).

      Paul,Samuel,Institutional Development in World Bank Projects: A Cross-Sectoral Review, Working Paper 392 (Washington: World Bank, 1990).

      Paul,Samuel,Accountability in Public Services: Exit, Voice, and Capture, Working Paper 614 (Washington: World Bank, 1991).

      Polanyi,Michael,The Logic of Liberty (London: Allen & Unwin, 1951).

      Porter,Michael E.,The Competitive Advantage of Nations (New York: Free Press, 1990).

      Premchand, A.,Performance Budgeting (Bombay: Academic Books, 1969).

      Premchand, A., “Budgetary Reforms in Developing Countries: Need for Renewal,”Finance & Development (1973).

      Premchand, A., “Government Lending Programs in OECD and Selected Developing Countries,”IMF Survey, Vol. 11 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, August2, 1982).

      Premchand, A.,Government Budgeting and Expenditure Controls (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1983).

      Premchand, A., “Government Budgeting and Productivity,”Public Productivity Review, No. 41 (1987) (reprinted inGovernment Budgeting, Theory, Process, Politics, ed. by Albert C.Hyde (ed) (Pacific Grove, California: Brooks/Cole, 1992)).

      Premchand, A., “Financial Management in Government: Are We Really Serious?”Public Fund Digest, Vol. 11, No. 2 (1988), pp. 6770.

      Premchand, A., “Coordination of Expenditure Policies in GCC Member States,”paper presented at a roundtable organized by the Arab Monetary Fund (Abu Dhabi, September1991).

      Premchand, A.,ed., Government Financial Management (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990).

      Premchand, A., and JesseBurkhead, ed., Comparative International Budgeting and Finance (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Books, 1984).

      Premchand, A., and A. L.Antonaya, (ed)ed., Aspectos del presupuesto publico (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1988).

      Premchand, A., and A. L.Antonaya,Premchand, A., and L.Garamfalvt, (ed) “Government Budget and Accounting Systems,” in Fiscal Policies in Economies in Transition, ed. by VitoTanzi (ed) (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1992).

      Quinn, J.B.,Strategies for Change: Logical Incrementalism (Romewood, Illinois: Irwin, 1980).

      Rainey,Hal G.,Robert W.Backoff, and Charles H.Levine, “Comparing Public and Private Organizations,”Public Administration Review (March/April1976).

      Rehfuss,John A.,Contracting Out in Government: A Guide to Working with Outside Contractors to Supply Public Services (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1989).

      Richardson,Eliot L., “The Value of Evaluation,”The G.A.O, Journal, No. 12 (Spring1991), pp. 3742.

      Rist,Ray C,ed., Program Evaluation and the Management of Government (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 1990).

      Robinson,Ann, and Bengt-ChristerYsander, “Re-establishing Budgetary Flexibility,”Public Budgeting and Finance, Vol. 2 (Autumn1982), pp. 2134.

      Robinson,David J., and Peter Stella, “Amalgamating Central Bank and Fiscal Deficits,” in Measurement of Fiscal Impact: Methodological Issues, ed. by Mario I.Blejer and Ke-YoungChu, (ed)Occasional Paper 59 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1988), pp. 2031.

      Roe,Emery M., “The Ceiling as Base: National Budgeting in Kenya,”Public Budgeting and Finance, Vol. 6 (Summer1986), pp. 87103.

      Rogers, H.G., M.A.Ulrich, and K.L.Traversy, “Evaluation in Practice: The State of the Art in Canadian Governments,”Canadian Public Administration, Vol. 24 (Fall1981), pp. 37186.

      Samuels,Warren J., (ed)ed., Institutional Economics, 3 vols. (London: Edward Elgar, 1988).

      Sappington,David E.M., “Incentives in Principal-Agent Relationships,”Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 5 (Spring1991), pp. 4566.

      Schick,Allen, “The Road to PPB: The Stages of Budget Reform,”Public Administration Review (December1966), pp. 24358.

      Schick,Allen, “Incremental Budgeting in a Decremental Age,”Policy Sciences, No. 16 (1983), pp. 125.

      Schick,Allen, “Macro-Budgeting Adaptations to Fiscal Stress in Industrialized Democracies,”Public Administration Review (March/April1986), pp. 12434.

      Schick,Allen, “Why the Deficit Persists as a Budget Problem: Role of Political Institutions,” in Government Financial Management: Issues and Country Studies, ed. by A.Premchand (ed) (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990), pp. 3852.

      Schultze,Charles L., “Of Wolves, Termites, and Pussycats: Or, Why We Should Worry About the Budget Deficit,”The Brookings Review, Vol. 7 (Summer1989), pp. 2633.

      Scott,Graham, PeterBushnell, and NikitinSallee, “Reform of the Core Public Sector: The New Zealand Experience,”Public Sector, Vol. 13, No. 3 (1990), pp. 1124.

      Sensenbrenner,Joseph, “Quality Comes to City Hall,”Harvard Business Review, Vol. 69 (March-April1991), pp. 6475.

      Shanghai University of Finance and Economics and Center for International Accounting Development, Accounting and Auditing in the People’s Republic of China: A Review of its Practices, Systems, Education, and Developments (Dallas: University of Texas, 1987).

      Simon,Herbert A., “Organizations and Markets,”Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 5 (Spring1991), pp. 2544.

      Staats,Elmer B., “Government Accounting: Promise and Performance,” in Government Financial Management: Issues and Country Studies, ed. by A.Premchand (ed) (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990), pp. 12834.

      Stiglitz,Joseph E., and others, The Economic Role of the State, ed. by ArnoldHeertje (ed) (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1989).

      Stockman,David, “The Crisis in Federal Budgeting,” in Crisis in the Budget Process: Exercising Political Choice, by AllenSchickwith papers by DavidStockman, RudolphPenner, TrentLott, LeonPanetta, and NormanOrstein (Washington: American Enterprise Institute, 1986), pp. 5766.

      Tanzi,Vito, “Fiscal Issues in Economies in Transition,” in Reforming Central and Eastern European Economies, ed. by VittorioCorbo, FabrizioCoricelli, and JanBossack (ed) (Washington: World Bank, 1991), pp. 22128.

      Tarschys,Daniel, “Curbing Public Expenditure: Current Trends,”Journal of Public Policy, Vol. 5 (February1985), pp. 2367.

      Tarschys,Daniel, “From Expansion to Restraint: Recent Developments in Budgeting,”Public Budgeting and Finance, Vol. 6 (Autumn1986), pp. 2537.

      Thomas, John W., and Merilee S. Grindle, “After the Decision: Implementing Policy Reforms in Developing Countries,”World Development, Vol. 18 (August1990), pp. 116381.

      Uchiteile,Louis, “But Just Who Is That Fairy Godmother?”New York Times, September29, 1991, Sec. 4, p. 1.

      United Kingdom, Financial Management in Government Departments, Cmnd. 9058 (London: H.M. Stationery Office, 1983).

      United Kingdom, The Financing and Accountability of Next Steps Agencies, CM 914 (London: H.M. Treasury, 1989).

      United Kingdom (1991a), Competing for Quality, CM 1730 (London: H.M. Treasury, 1991).

      United Kingdom (1991b), Improving Management in Government: The Next Steps Agencies, Review 1991, CM 1760 (London: H.M. Treasury, 1991).

      United Kingdom, National Audit Office (1991a), Annual Report (London, 1991).

      United Kingdom (1991b), A Framework for Value for Money Audits (London, 1991).

      United Kingdom (1991c), NHS Outpatient Services (London, 1991).

      United Kingdom (1991d), Presenting Data Reports (London, 1991).

      United Kingdom (1991e), Promoting Value for Money from Grants (London, 1991).

      United Kingdom, Privy Council, Efficiency in the Civil Service, Cmnd. 8293 (London: H.M. Stationery Office, 1981).

      United States, Congress, Management Theories in the Private and Public Sectors, 98th Cong., 2nd Sess., September1984 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1984).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Trends in Public Investment (Washington, 1987).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Management of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 1989 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1989).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget (1992a), Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 1993 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1992).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget (1992b), Form and Content of Agency Financial Statements, Bulletin No, 93–02 (Washington: Government Printing Office, October22, 1992).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board, Financial Resources, Funded Liabilities, and Net Financial Resources of Funded Entities (Exposure Draft) (Washington, November1991).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, General Accounting Office, Designing Evaluation, Methodology Transfer Paper 4 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1984).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Managing the Cost of Government; Building an Effective Financial Management Structure, 2 vols. (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1985).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Federal Government Reporting System (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1986).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Managing the Cost of Government (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1989).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Public Debt: Management Actions Needed to Ensure More Accurate Accounting (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1990).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Federal Credit and Insurance Programs: Actions That Could Minimize a Growing Risk (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1991).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Comptroller General’s 1991 Annual Report (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1992).

      United States, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Governmental Accounting Standards Board, Objectives of Financial Reporting (Washington, 1987).

      Visscher,Christian De, “The Modernization of Budgetary Techniques and Financial Control,”International Review of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 55 (September1989), pp. 32164.

      Wattle worth,Michael, “Credit Subsidies in Budgetary Lending: Computation, Effects, and Fiscal Implications,” in Measurement of Fiscal Impact: Methodological Issues, ed. by Mario I.Blejer and Ke-YoungChu, (ed)Occasional Paper 59 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1988), pp. 5769.

      Weber,Max,Economy and Society, ed. by GuentherRoth and ClausWittich, (ed)2 vols. (Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1978). (See, in particular, Chapter XI on “Bureaucracy,” pp. 9561005.)

      Wesberry,James P., Jr., “Government Accounting and Financial Management in Latin American Countries,” in Government Financial Management: Issues and Country Studies, ed. by A.Premchand (ed) (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990), pp. 345–74.

      Wholey,Joseph S., Kathryn E.Newcomer,and Associates, Improving Government Performance: Evaluation Strategies for Strengthening Public Agencies and Programs (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1989).

      Wilson,James Q.,Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It (New York: Basic Books, 1989).

      World Bank, Toward Sustained Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Joint Program of Action (Washington: World Bank, 1984).

      World Bank (1988a), Adjustment Lending: An Evaluation of Ten Years of Experience (Washington: World Bank, 1988).

      World Bank (1988b), World Development Report (Washington: World Bank, 1988).

      World Bank, World Development Report: The Challenge of Development, 1991 (Washington: World Bank, 1991).

      Yates,Douglas,Bureaucratic Democracy (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1982).

      Ysander,Bengt-Christer, and AnnRobinson, “The Inflexibility of Contemporary Budgets,”Public Budgeting and Finance, Vol. 2 (Autumn1982), pp. 720.

      Zussman,David, and Jak Jabes,The Vertical Solitude: Managing in the Public Sector (Halifax, Nova Scotia: Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1989).

    For a more recent presentation of the point-counterpoint approaches in this regard, see Mautz (1991) and Douglas and Anthony (1991).

    Interest payments and the accounts of enterprises or commercial types of activities were recorded on an accrual basis even in cash-based systems, however.

    Even in a cash-based system there may be large noncash transactions, particularly those stemming from receipts of foreign aid.

    See United States, Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (1991). This expanded coverage is partly implemented in the United States. Also, see United States, Executive Office of the President (1992b).

    Similar statements also have to be furnished by departments in New Zealand, which has introduced commercial-type accrual systems for the Government as a whole. However, in contrast to the practice in the United States, the structure of the budget has also been changed in New Zealand to that of a balance sheet, thus facilitating full congruence between the budgetary and accounting systems. In Chile both budget and accounting systems follow a balance sheet approach.

    This difference now exists in the practices of the Federal Government in the United States: Outlays of more than $5,000 on assets that have an average life span of two years are considered capital expenditures. No such distinctions are maintained in the budget. However, for information purposes, the outlays on capital are separately computed and shown in one of the analytical documents of the budget.

    The U.S. Governmental Accounting Standards Board, which is mainly concerned with specifying standards for state and local governments, followed a variation of this approach. It divided the users into three groups: citizenry, legislative oversight bodies, and investors and creditors. See United States, Governmental Accounting Standards Board (1987), p. 1.

    For example, the Monthly Treasury Statement issued by the U.S. Treasury contains detailed information on the means of financing budget deficits, the analysis of changes in liabilities, the financing of federal agency borrowing, and related aspects. Similar details are available in the publications of other industrial countries. In developing countries, data on debt are usually published by the central banks. (These data may not always reconcile with the budgetary data.) Many countries routinely publish data about their receipts and outflows, but these data may not always permit an assessment of the trends as information on the previous periods or the relationship of the actual to target (if any) is not provided.

      You are not logged in and do not have access to this content. Please login or, to subscribe to IMF eLibrary, please click here

      Other Resources Citing This Publication