2 Institutional Aspects of Public Expenditure Management
Author: A. Premchand1
  • 1 0000000404811396https://isni.org/isni/0000000404811396International Monetary Fund

Abstract

All the truth and all the pleasure, lies in the details.

All the truth and all the pleasure, lies in the details.

STENDHAL

The success achieved in formulating and implementing fiscal policy and the translation of the various presumptions about accountability into material actions depend largely on the attention that public authorities devote to the design and day-to-day operations of the expenditure management system. Neglect of these operations, which deal with the various technical aspects of the system, can have far-reaching implications for the management of public money. The details of these operations, as well as the way in which they are addressed, differ from country to country, and vary according to economic conditions. They have a profound and enduring effect on the system of values that governs expenditure management. Procedures, systems, and institutions and their operations constitute tangible instruments, whereas values are soft and less tangible. The analysis here is relatively narrow, recognizing that although managers tend to give more attention to systems and structures, the role of values is also important.

The core of expenditure management has revolved around the pursuit of economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in mobilizing, allocating, and utilizing monetary resources that form the public treasury. But each country pursues these goals in its own way. Although many areas in the practices converge, there are also areas that do not. The intent here is not to provide a comparative history of the practices, their antecedents, and current implications,1 but to provide a comparative perspective on them and how they facilitate or hinder the pursuit of expenditure management goals. Present practices, however, have evolved over a long period and some countries’ practices may have changed considerably over time. These changes are discussed broadly in the following sections.

Typologies and Their Viability

Country practices have so far been analyzed largely in terms of typologies based on legal and constitutional traditions, political traditions, government economic philosophies, economic conditions and relative stages of prosperity, industrial and commodity orientation, and administrative and political legacies. For example, the legal typology envisaged the analysis in terms of Roman-Germanic law or English law. Countries with a Roman-Germanic legal tradition (civil law countries) have well-developed, comprehensive legislation governing all aspects of expenditure management, whereas countries with an English legal tradition (common law countries) have relatively limited legislation or specification in law.

Similarly, distinctions have been sought in terms of political orientation or the role of the legislature or its corresponding entity (which in socialist regimes may be a people’s congress) in expenditure management. As will be illustrated below, the respective roles of the legislature and the executive in the macro and micro management of a country’s finances differ from one type of country to another. Typologies have also been envisaged in terms of the economic philosophies or the degree of market orientation found in a country’s economic management. Thus, countries were classified as mixed economies, market economies, and centrally planned economies, and as industrial countries and developing countries. In another variation, countries were also classified as rich and poor. Another approach has been to group countries in terms of their administrative and legal legacy and tradition. Each approach, however, provides only a glimpse into the intricacies of the systems, and a system may have some features of each of the preceding groups. Each offers a framework of analysis for specific purposes.

In describing the unique features of national practices, it should be noted that most are the result of colonial legacies, or of the constitutional and legal traditions of countries. Some colonies (for example, the United States) tried to distance themselves from their colonial traditions and developed their own systems, which in turn became models for other countries. In what follows, the approaches of administrative tradition, region, and market orientation are eclectically combined to examine the systems’ features.

Systems Groups

In terms of general traditions and administrative legacies, seven broad and illustrative types of systems can be identified.2 The British type of budgetary system is primarily drawn from the United Kingdom, which has evolved its own approaches to financial management over a long time and is to be found in Commonwealth countries in Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean. Although the United Kingdom itself had few budgetary laws, the former colonies have a well-developed legal charter governing expenditure management. The system in these countries largely revolves around a consolidated fund, which is cash based, and into which all revenues and expenditures flow. Legislative approval is needed for almost all appropriations except for “charged expenditures,” which continue irrespective of the government in power. Revenue proposals are usually secret, and budgeting of resources follows parallel paths from expenditure budgets that converge only at the penultimate stage of formulation. Operations of spending agencies are subject to different degrees of control during the resource management stage.

The French system is also found in its former colonies (and variants are found in Latin American and Middle Eastern countries) and is distinguished by two features—a highly centralized financial control system and a central treasury. The control system has three operational levels: comptrollers attached to spending ministries and overseeing their transactions; a cadre of public accountants responsible for collecting and disbursing public moneys; and inspectors of finance representing a staff function and embodying the government’s financial conscience. The treasury functions as both a cashier and a banker. Although the number of funds that form the nucleus of the financial system were initially only a few, they tended to grow as a result of “debudgetization.” Special funds outside the purview of the budget are more numerous in some French-speaking African countries.

A third type may be identified as the European system. Included in this group are Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, and the Nordic countries. Of these, the Dutch, Italian, and Portuguese systems are to be found in their former colonies, such as Indonesia and Somalia. The Dutch system shows greater adaptation to the practices of the commercial world, including double-entry bookkeeping, provision for depreciation, and, until recently, accrual-based accounting. The Italian system, until the changes in the mid-1970s when cash-based systems were introduced, had provisions for continuation of funds beyond the fiscal year and a parallel operation of the preceding and current years’ budgets controlled by the Comptroller General.

The U.S. system is largely centered around a general budget and several trust funds. A major feature of this system, as distinct from others (that also have a general fund and several trust funds), is the role of the legislature, which, in the end, prepares its own budget.

A somewhat more amorphous category is what may broadly be called the Latin American type. These countries, which initially adopted procedures that had a strong Spanish influence, developed their own hybrid systems as a by-product of their administrative experience.3 The main features of this system are extensive earmarking of funds, decentralization of government activities into autonomous agencies, reliance on modified accrual or noncash basis, and, in some countries, combined accounting and audit machinery. Within these broad types of systems, various financial management practices have evolved, with several common and dissimilar features.

Another distinct variety is the Far Eastern budgetary system, which appears to have been influenced, in terms of both organization and approaches to budgeting, by the United States and Japan. This system usually comprises a general account, several special accounts dealing with specialized or quasi-trading activities, and extrabudgetary accounts, of which the most important are the fiscal investment and loan programs, largely financed by borrowing. Practices of this type are found in the Republic of Korea, the Philippines, and Thailand.

The final group comprises those countries that now constitute centrally planned economies in transition, which include countries from Eastern Europe (excluding Yugoslavia, which has a unique system), Algeria (with an additional layer of central planning over the traditional French-type system), China, Myanmar (formerly Burma), and Viet Nam. The budgetary and accounting systems in these countries have significant common features, all of which have been heavily influenced by the central planning system that evolved in the former Soviet Union. The budgets follow the framework indicated in their development plans, and the coverage is frequently the same as that of the national government in that the budgets of provinces, municipalities, and communes are included in the national budget. Also, because of the preponderance of public enterprises, the transactions between government and enterprises (including taxes paid, depreciation resources transferred to the government budget, subsidies to enterprises, and investment transfers) dominate the budget. In recent years, this factor has also contributed to the emergence of a large variety of extrabudgetary accounts comprising enterprise and administrative activities, as a result of the change in the approach toward market-oriented management. The extent of dependence of the government on its central bank for managing its liquidity and maintaining its accounts is another feature of these economies.

Other Approaches

The economic conditions of a country strongly affect the country’s approach to expenditure management. The case of what started as “undeveloped,” later became “underdeveloped,” and later, “less developed” or “developing” countries is an illustration. These countries, which gained independence during a two-decade period after the Second World War, resorted to large-scale development planning, which then revealed the limitations of traditional budget systems. The traditional systems, which were primarily input oriented and with legal accountability as their primary objective, proved inadequate to meet the emerging needs of investment budgets. Investment appraisal was therefore introduced, and a number of countries also took the opportunity to bring in development budgets instead of traditional capital budgets. This change contributed over the years to a whole set of new practices as well as to a multitude of issues in relations between ministries of finance and ministries of planning and to the relative primacy of each in overall expenditure management. Years of planning experience contributed to a general acceptance of this element as a standard fixture of expenditure management, which, since the late 1970s and early 1980s, has taken the form of rolling expenditure planning and multiyear estimates that are now common in a number of industrial countries.

Another response to changing economic conditions relates to the impact of inflation. Countries with high rates of inflation had to devise new methods to examine the implications of monetary expansion for expenditure estimates. This, in turn, contributed to a more in-depth examination of the mix of labor and capital in the expenditure profiles of each agency, and to the development as well as the use of indices that would reflect the unique features of each spending agency. Inflation also caused the introduction of a system of cash limits to ensure that government expenditures were maintained at stipulated levels rather than increased by automatically applying various types of indices.

Events since the early 1970s, such as stagflation and the high level of budget deficits, demonstrated the linkages between the economy and the budget and their mutual impact on each other. These linkages contributed over the years to a greater integration of economic analysis with budget making so that the resource constraints could be explicitly recognized in the process. But such integration is more common in the industrial countries where National Income Accounts data are available on a regular basis. Although a growing trend toward integration is also discernible in developing countries, data limitations prevent full utilization of the potential benefits.

The fiscal stress—in terms of the structural imbalance between government receipts and expenditures as well as the short-term imbalances—has contributed to a common experience in several countries regardless of their economic philosophy and market orientation. Further, it also gave rise to several questions about the adequacy of fiscal instruments, which are examined more intensively in Chapter 3.

Current Practices

Generally, all countries have an annual budget system. In Bahrain, the budget is on a biennial basis. In Uruguay, a five-year budget is formulated in real terms and the annual budget is updated in nominal or monetary terms, using a complex vector of prices. In Sweden, since 1990, a triennial budget has been prepared within the overall framework of multiyear estimates. In most cases, funds lapse at the end of the fiscal year, but there are exceptions. In some countries, although annual budgets are formulated on a cash basis, the appropriations are on the basis of obligation authority (for example, the United States), which permits the agencies to spend amounts so long as such authority is valid. In some countries (for example, in the Middle East) appropriations for the development budget are made on an extended basis and funds are available until projects are completed.4 Sweden has a system of extended grants in which funds can be spent over a period of years. In a number of Central and South American countries, there is a complementary period that may well extend to six months beyond the fiscal year that permits funds to be spent during the extended period.5

Budget offices are usually located in ministries of finance. In a number of developing countries, the purview of these ministries has been limited to revenues and current budgets, whereas foreign aid and related external resources as well as outlays for development undertaken as part of a plan were the responsibilities of the ministries of planning. In some countries, budget offices are located in the office of the president (for example, the United States), in the office of the prime minister (Thailand), in the planning bureau (Korea), or are organized as a separate department (Australia), or as a separate ministry (France, until recently). The functions of the budget office are similar even though locations differ.

In some systems, the role of the legislature or its equivalent (such as a people’s congress in China and the former Soviet Union) is more pronounced than in others, as noted previously. The legislature may formulate its own budget, substantially modify the proposals of the executive, or may merely acquiesce in the proposals of the executive. The approach of the legislature may sometimes be restricted to the increments proposed in the budget, whereas in others it may be required to approve both continuing and new outlays. In some countries, the legislature imposes ceilings on the level of budget deficit (for example, the United States), whereas some others require a balanced budget (for example, Japan and Indonesia). Such a requirement is more like an accounting balance as receipts (which sometimes include proceeds from domestic and external borrowing) have to equal outlays. Legal limits on domestic borrowing exist in some countries (the Netherlands and the United States), and in others such borrowing cannot be undertaken without the approval of the legislature (Canada). These legal aspects cover, in some cases, the details of financial management, including restrictions on the creation of posts in government, reappropriation from one program to another or within a program (virement), and excess of expenditure over that approved by the legislature.

Budget coverage varies from one country to another. In general, however, there has been a gradual tendency to create autonomous funds, generally financed by earmarked revenues, to perform activities traditionally carried out as part of the budget. Such autonomous entities are numerous in Central and South America. A related aspect is the existence and operation of what are known as quasi-fiscal accounts operated by the central bank. Both these practices suggest that, in determining the goals of fiscal policy, the total transactions—within and outside the budget—should be taken into account.

Classifying the budget into a functional and program approach is now common. Two countries—Chile and New Zealand—follow a modified balance sheet approach to present the receipts and outlays of each agency. A number of both industrial and developing countries provide multiyear estimates, usually ranging up to three years. In some countries (for example, Australia and the United Kingdom), these multiyear estimates are of considerable importance and usually provide the framework within which annual budgets are made.

The other features may be examined in terms of resource management and information systems needed for resource planning and management. Resource management involves the application of three basic principles: propriety, accountability, and the adequacy of systems for delivery of services to the community. Propriety refers to the application of funds for the purposes approved by the legislature, and accountability to implementing policy prudently and transparently, and producing results commensurate with outlays. A wide variety of practices are found at this stage, particularly in regard to payments. In most countries, the spending agencies are empowered to authorize payments against their budgetary provisions and apportionments. (In systems of the British type, no organized procedures for apportionments exist to facilitate a time-slice-based release of funds.) However, certain specified transactions (usually above monetary ceilings) require the prior approval of the ministry of finance. In systems of the French type, a visa has to be obtained from the relevant authorized officials before making commitments. In some countries, however, the spending departments and agencies are free to make commitments and to process payment authorizations within approved budget estimates. In most countries, the final issue of checks is made by the ministry of finance and its agencies. In systems of the British type, checks are issued on the basis of the review of vouchers and related documentation by the pay and accounts officers or accountants general who serve under the ministry of finance. In systems of the French type, they are issued by the treasury, which is also responsible for managing all financial resources. In the United States, checks are issued by the disbursing officers who are the specified agents of the treasury.

In the centrally planned economies, spending agencies are free to spend (authorize and pay) the budgetary allocations after approval of the budget. In most cases, the productive or developmental departments (a classification traditionally urged by economists but applied so far only in centrally planned economies) are even assigned a government-owned development bank that acts as a payment agency. This bank is also sometimes responsible for compiling the accounts of the agency for which it is acting as banker.

In some countries, payment authorizations are subject to internal audit by the general accounting office or similar organization, and checks are issued only with their clearance. In spite of these elaborate checks and balances, expenditures in excess of approved amounts do occur but the process of dealing with them differs among systems. In systems of the British type, although excess expenditures are not encouraged, they are legalized on the recommendations of legislative committees. In systems of the U.S. type, excesses are not permitted. In others, excesses are in principle subject to penalties, but in practice they are rarely invoked. Failures in resource management contribute to overpayment and underpayment and to fraud in the handling of government moneys.

These practices should also be seen in terms of the design of the information systems, which play a supporting role and are primarily intended to produce data for use by decision makers inside and to some extent outside government. In recent years, there has been a greater commonality among countries, largely reflecting the availability of computer technology. The introduction of technology has facilitated the operation of payrolls, recording of commitments and payment lags and of the availability of goods and services, maintenance of inventory of assets, and compilation of domestic and external debt transactions. It is now common in a number of countries for budget requests and data on monthly financial transactions to be processed on diskettes. In some others, project accounting has developed significantly (for example, Chile) through the introduction of electronic data processing. In Middle Eastern countries, where massive development plans revealed a shortage of trained manpower, timely investment in the introduction and use of computer technology appears to have paid handsome dividends. The differences are now largely in terms of the capacity of the computer and the end-use of the information produced. Practices in industrial and developing countries show a number of common problems. First, accounting statements are often not useful for expenditure control and seem to be more geared to compliance with the law.6 Enormous delays and reconciliation of different transactions continue to be major sources of frustration. Second, the accounting statements are still inadequate for evaluating programs and for assessing performance in terms of costs and effectiveness. Third, the statements’ utility in aiding decision making by providing adequate cost information on whether services should be performed by government or contracted out is still to be demonstrated. Fourth, the statements are not yet helpful in indicating the magnitudes of postemployment benefits or the current status of assets.

Modular Presentation of Features

The general features described above permit only a glance into the broad functioning of the system. In practice several other features need to be taken into account, and for this purpose, expenditure management is divided into seven modules—macroeconomic framework, budget preparation and planning, budget coverage, financial control, fiscal reporting, the institutions engaged in budget administration and decision making, and budget classification. To illustrate these aspects, data on 46 countries from various regions, representing a cross section of the broad groupings discussed earlier, are presented in tables in Appendix I. These tables show the range of devices and the stages at which they are deployed in the management process. The data presented in the tables, however, may have changed in some countries since their preparation. The tables should therefore be considered illustrations. Also, in selecting countries, less emphasis has been placed on the origins or the legacy of the system. Indeed, a cursory examination of the tables suggests several commonalities in institutions, systems, and operational procedures. These features also illustrate the need for viewing these modules as part of a composite culture rather than as separate fields in which actions converge more by accident than by design. The success of the SEEE paradigm is dependent on the unity of purpose shown through the various stages.

Little can be said about the success attained from the use of instruments. Indeed, without an evaluative framework, it is difficult to determine the extent to which they have been used at all. Their existence alone should not be taken as proof that they are used and used objectively. In public expenditure management, the existence of an instrument suggests that some thought has been given to a problem, and an approach evolved to deal with that problem. But the actual usage is a different matter that cannot always be gleaned from organizational charts and related regulations.

Thus, to ascertain the different problems stemming from the use of the various systems, a questionnaire was prepared and circulated to several budget officials from industrial and developing countries as well as from former centrally planned economies. This survey conducted by the author in two successive years yielded consistent results over the period, but differed according to the type of country surveyed. To facilitate grading or ranking, problems were divided into a dozen clusters–public expenditure planning, attention to special areas, resource planning, budget structure and classification, economy and efficiency in expenditure, fiscal management stress, quality of information, budget implementation or resource use, budgetary outcomes, accounting and financial reporting, and public enterprises—and the respondents were asked to rank the problems in degree of severity and occurrence.

In public expenditure planning, industrial country representatives felt that excessive political interference was a major problem. The representatives of planned economies thought that the major problem areas were excessive rigidity in expenditures and fragmentation of responsibilities between planning and finance agencies, whereas officials of the developing countries, in particular those from sub-Saharan Africa, viewed the poor implementation of rolling expenditure planning as a major problem.

In the cluster relating to the attention paid to special problem areas, officials from industrial countries believed that productivity in government and operation and maintenance expenditures received the least attention. While sharing this view, officials of planned economies thought adjustment for inflation received too little attention. Officials of developing countries believed that control of personnel expenditures was the major problem. In regard to resource planning, officials of industrial countries believed that the absence of convergence between expenditure and revenue budgets at an early stage of the process was a problem, while those from planned economies and developing countries felt that the planning of revenue resources (and external resources for the developing countries) constituted a major problem.

The officials of industrial countries believed the budget structure to be adequate for accountability but in need of improvement for internal management by agencies. The developing and planned economies’ representatives felt that the classification of current and capital items was inconsistent and that in general it was inadequate for both economic analysis and program review. Securing economies and efficiency in expenditures seemed to be an unexplored area in planned economies, while the officials of industrial and developing countries believed that evolving reliable and consistent performance indicators was a major problem. In the cluster relating to fiscal management stress, it was generally agreed that across-the-board cuts did not have much effect. Reductions in manpower and related inputs were common dilemmas, regardless of the countries and their systems, and were partly attributable to the poor quality of government information. Officials of industrial countries considered the major problem was lack of reliable data on the quantitative or volume aspects of expenditures.

In regard to budget implementation, all officials shared to varying degrees the view that the problem was a rush of expenditure toward the end of the fiscal year, while those from the developing world felt in addition that a major problem was the identification, measurement, and clearance of arrears in payments. The different budgetary outcomes were attributed by those from the planned economies to the price levels that were higher than assumed in the budget, and all agreed that changes in the macroeconomic assumptions underlying the budget were an overall problem. In regard to accounting, officials of industrial countries viewed implementation of accrual accounting as the major problem, while all others believed that the archaic functioning of treasury systems was the issue. The assessment of the financial performance of state enterprises and their supervision and control by governments left a lot to be desired, all groups felt.

These views, which were collected during 1990 and 1991, may reflect the priorities of the time and may therefore change in the future. But together they provide a snapshot of the period and the challenges that lie ahead.

1

Some ideas about comparative recent experience can be formed from the country studies included in Premchand and Burkhead (1984) and Premchand (1990).

2

The first six groups are described in greater detail in Premchand (1983), Chap. 5.

3

For a fuller discussion of these developments, see Wesberry (1990).

4

In general, budgets can be formulated by two approaches—funding and limiting. Under the former, funds are made available to complete a project regardless of its time profile; the latter aims at restricting the funds available to specified levels within a fiscal year.

5

In recent years, several countries of the British Commonwealth that had observed the annual lapsability procedure have started to extend the unspent capital outlays (through supplementary provision in the following year) to avoid an excessive rush of expenditure at the end of the fiscal year (for example, Australia and the United Kingdom).

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

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Anshen, Melvin, “The Federal Budget as an Instrument for Management and Analysis,” in Program Budgeting: Program Analysis and Federal Budget, ed. by David Novick (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1965), pp. 323.

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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/December 1980).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bery, K., “Economic Policy Reform in Developing Countries: The Role and Management of Political Factors,” World Development, Vol. 18 (August 1990), pp. 112331.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bhatia, Rattan J., The West African Monetary Union: An Analytical Review, Occasional Paper 35 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1985).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Boum, John., “Helping the Nation Spend Wisely,” International journal of Government Auditing (October 1989), 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, eds., Macroeconomic Policies in an Interdependent World, Brookings Institution, Center for Economic Policy Research, and International Monetary Fund (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1989).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Buchanan, James M., Fiscal Theory and Political Economy: Selected Essays (Chapel Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, 1960).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Burns, James M., Leadership (New York: Harper & Row, 1979).

  • Campbell, Harrison S., “Procurement and Management of Spares,” in Defense Management, ed. by Stephen Enke (New York: Prentice-Hall, 1967), pp. 187229.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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 Carol Stewart (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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Danziger, James N., and Peter Smith Ring, “Fiscal Limitations: A Selective Review of Recent Research,” Public Administration Review (January/February 1982).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dixit, Avinash K., and Barry Nalebuff, Thinking Strategically: The Competitive Edge in Business, Politics, and Everyday Life (New York: Norton, 1991).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Donahue, John D., The Privatization Decision: Public Ends, Private Means (New York: Basic Books, 1989).

  • Dopson, Sue, and Rosemary Stewart, “Public and Private Sector Management: The Case for a Wider Debate,” Public Money and Management, Vol. 10 (Spring 1990).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Douglas, Patricia P., and Robert N. Anthony, “An Analysis of the Government Accounting Model,” The Government Accountant’s Journal (Summer 1991), pp. 2534.

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

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Durham, Paul, 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 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990).

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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 Vittorio Corbo, Fabrizio Coricelli, and Jan Bossak (Washington: World Bank, 1991), pp. 6583.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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/Summer 1988), 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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.

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hiromoto, Toshiro, “Another Hidden Edge—Japanese Management Accounting,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 66 (July-August 1988), pp. 2226.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Home, Jocelyn, and Paul R. Masson, “Scope and Limits of International Economic Cooperation and Policy Coordination,” Staff Papers, International Monetary Fund, Vol. 35 (June 1988), pp. 25984.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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 (Winter 1990), pp. 1320.

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kapur, Ishan, Michael T. Hadjimichael, Paul Hilbers, Jerald Schiff, and Philippe Szymczak, Ghana: Adjustment and Growth, 1983–91, Occasional Paper 86 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1991).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Keating, Michael, and David Rosalky, “Rolling Expenditure Plans: Australian Experience and Prognosis,” in Government Financial Management, ed. by A. Premchand (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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-June 1958), pp. 6975.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Korff, Hans Clausen, “Planning and Budgeting in the Federal Republic of Germany,” in Comparative International Budgeting and Finance, ed. by A. Premchand and Jesse Burkhead (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Books, 1984), pp. 3953.

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Leonard, David K., “The Political Realities of African Management,” World Development, Vol. 15 (July 1987), pp. 899910.

  • Levine, Charles H., “Organizational Decline and Cutback Management,” Public Administration Review (July/August 1978), pp. 33316325.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lewis, Verne B., “Reflections on Budget Systems,” Public Budgeting and Finance, Vol. 8 (Spring 1988), 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 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990), pp. 307325.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Likierman, Andrew, and Alison Taylor, Government’s New Departmental Reports: Challenges and Potential Problems (London: Certified Accountants Publications Ltd., 1990).

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lynn, Jonathan, and Anthony Jay, ed., The Complete Yes Minister (London: British Broadcasting Corporation, 1984).

  • McCaffery, Jerry, “Canada’s Envelope Budget: A Strategic Management System,” Public Administration Review (July/August 1984), pp. 31623.

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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 (Fall 1989).

  • Mautz, R.K., “Generally Accepted Principles,” Public Budgeting and Finance (Winter 1991), 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 (Summer 1991), pp. 8397.

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

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mowl, Colin, and Philippa Todd, Central Government Funds and Accounts and the Central Government Borrowing Requirement (London: H.M. Treasury, 1990).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Nader, Ralph, “Run the Government Like the Best American Corporations,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 66 (November-December 1988), pp. 8186.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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, August 2, 1982).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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 in Government Budgeting, Theory, Process, Politics, ed. by Albert C. Hyde (Pacific Grove, California: Brooks/Cole, 1992)).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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, September 1991).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Premchand, A., ed., Government Financial Management (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990).

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Premchand, A., and A. L. Antonaya, ed., Aspectos del presupuesto publico (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1988).

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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/April 1976).

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Richardson, Eliot L., “The Value of Evaluation,” The G.A.O, Journal, No. 12 (Spring 1991), pp. 3742.

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

  • Robinson, Ann, and Bengt-Christer Ysander, “Re-establishing Budgetary Flexibility,” Public Budgeting and Finance, Vol. 2 (Autumn 1982), pp. 2134.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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-Young Chu, Occasional Paper 59 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1988), pp. 2031.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Roe, Emery M., “The Ceiling as Base: National Budgeting in Kenya,” Public Budgeting and Finance, Vol. 6 (Summer 1986), pp. 87103.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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 (Fall 1981), pp. 37186.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Samuels, Warren J., ed., Institutional Economics, 3 vols. (London: Edward Elgar, 1988).

  • Sappington, David E.M., “Incentives in Principal-Agent Relationships,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 5 (Spring 1991), pp. 4566.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schick, Allen, “The Road to PPB: The Stages of Budget Reform,” Public Administration Review (December 1966), 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/April 1986), pp. 12434.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990), pp. 3852.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schultze, Charles L., “Of Wolves, Termites, and Pussycats: Or, Why We Should Worry About the Budget Deficit,” The Brookings Review, Vol. 7 (Summer 1989), pp. 2633.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Scott, Graham, Peter Bushnell, and Nikitin Sallee, “Reform of the Core Public Sector: The New Zealand Experience,” Public Sector, Vol. 13, No. 3 (1990), pp. 1124.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sensenbrenner, Joseph, “Quality Comes to City Hall,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 69 (March-April 1991), 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Simon, Herbert A., “Organizations and Markets,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 5 (Spring 1991), pp. 2544.

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

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Stiglitz, Joseph E., and others, The Economic Role of the State, ed. by Arnold Heertje (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1989).

  • Stockman, David, “The Crisis in Federal Budgeting,” in Crisis in the Budget Process: Exercising Political Choice, by Allen Schick with papers by David Stockman, Rudolph Penner, Trent Lott, Leon Panetta, and Norman Orstein (Washington: American Enterprise Institute, 1986), pp. 5766.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Tanzi, Vito, “Fiscal Issues in Economies in Transition,” in Reforming Central and Eastern European Economies, ed. by Vittorio Corbo, Fabrizio Coricelli, and Jan Bossack (Washington: World Bank, 1991), pp. 22128.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Tarschys, Daniel, “Curbing Public Expenditure: Current Trends,” Journal of Public Policy, Vol. 5 (February 1985), pp. 2367.

  • Tarschys, Daniel, “From Expansion to Restraint: Recent Developments in Budgeting,” Public Budgeting and Finance, Vol. 6 (Autumn 1986), pp. 2537.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Thomas, John W., and Merilee S. Grindle, “After the Decision: Implementing Policy Reforms in Developing Countries,” World Development, Vol. 18 (August 1990), pp. 116381.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Uchiteile, Louis, “But Just Who Is That Fairy Godmother?” New York Times, September 29, 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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., September 1984 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1984).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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, October 22, 1992).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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, November 1991).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Visscher, Christian De, “The Modernization of Budgetary Techniques and Financial Control,” International Review of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 55 (September 1989), pp. 32164.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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-Young Chu, Occasional Paper 59 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1988), pp. 5769.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Weber, Max, Economy and Society, ed. by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich, 2 vols. (Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1978). (See, in particular, Chapter XI on “Bureaucracy,” pp. 9561005.)

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1990), pp. 345–74.

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