Following the jettisoning of laissez-fair doctrine, governments feel compelled to ensure that their economies are managed to achieve major desirable objectives of full employment, price stability, economic growth and external balance (Ohale and Onyema 2002). It was the Keynesian Economists, through the work of John Maynard Keynes in his philosophy of active involvement of government in the economy that popularized the notion of public expenditure as a stabilization tool, for ailing economies during shocks and depressions as it was the case during the period of the great depression in the 1930s. Over the years, therefore, intervention of government in the management and operation of the Nigerian economy has become more popular. Therefore the government has consistently employed the publicbudgeting framework through allocations of revenue and expenditure estimates to drive macroeconomic policy in order to steer the economy on the path of stable growth and development, in line with key objectives and growth indices of government. However, over time the performance of public budgets in Nigeria has been dismal and this has brought to the fore, the Abstract: The study examined PublicBudgeting and Economic Growth in Nigeria. The major objective of the study was to review recent issues affecting budgeting in Nigeria and to determine how they have affected the growth of the Nigerian economy over the period 1987 to 2016. Data on Economic growth (proxied by Real Gross Domestic Product), Capital Expenditure, Government Expenditures on Education, Agriculture, Health and Per Capita Income were sourced from Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Statistical Bulletin. The data were analyzed using the Vector Error Correction Model (VECM) technique. The result of the analysis revealed that Government Capital Expenditure, Government Expenditures on Education, Agriculture, Health and Per Capita Income are all significant determinants of economic growth in Nigeria with over 73% reliability. The study recommended that public budget provisions should focus more on the real sector as their indicators have shown that they are capable of promoting economic growth of Nigeria.
The preparation of publicbudgeting varies among states due to the differences in their legal doctrines and administrative devices. Jordan as a developing country is more centralized in regards to the budgetary process and the preparation procedures are conducted at the central government level. The three essential powers are cooperated to formulate the national budget proposal under the separation of power and check and balances principle to ensure equal power among three branches and no branch becomes more powerful than another (Wilson, 1989). The Jordan national budget making occurs at four major phases; phase I: the preparation of a national budget proposal. Phase II: national budget adoption. Phase III: national budget execution and phase IV: Evaluation and auditing. The budget process at the national level is implemented in accordance with the Budget Act and Parliament's Standing Orders. Jordanian public budget covers only one fiscal year which is the calendar year. Yet, the evaluation and auditing may extend longer than the fiscal year. The following describes the main procedures to prepare the national budget in Jordan.
disappeared from the coffers of Illinois government. Immediately the accumulated backlog of bills which had been partially paid down, started to build back up again. Constant wrangling broke out between the Democrats in the General Assembly and the new Republican Governor and his allies in the legislature. The result was that when the Democrats sent Rauner a budget he vetoed it and the Democrats could not override his veto. A deep impasse developed. Money continued to be spent, generally at the FY2015 level for a variety of essential services under court order or due to the requirements of various federal grants for matching funds. During this time the two areas most vulnerable under these impromptu rules were social services and higher education. K-12 was taken off the table early by action agreed to by the governor and leaders of the General Assembly from both parties since neither group wanted to bear the onus of not funding public schools when they were scheduled to open in August 2015. Universities and community colleges, on the other hand had no such protection, and they immediately began to suffer since with no budget there were no state funds forthcoming automatically. Their students and their families also suffered because the state started withholding MAP grants which tens of thousands of Illinois students relied on to fund their university or college tuition. Several universities moved immediately to use local funds to temporarily pay for the MAP grants. This loss of state funds was somewhat alleviated by two “stopgap” budget bills which partially funded the universities for the short term; however, when it was all over for two fiscal years they had received only 41.5% of what they would have received from state subsidy under the FY2015 base (Miller, June 4, 2018, 1). In addition the resort to stopgap budgets created enormous uncertainty and dislocations for the universities and their students and wreaked havoc on their ability to plan.
Dr. Ward’s teaching activities include financial management, healthcare accounting, and applied research methods. Dr. Ward’s research activities have focused on the use of cost- effectiveness analysis and linear programming for increasing the efficiency of health care spending. Dr. Ward has numerous peer-reviewed publications in journals such as Health Care Financing Review, PublicBudgeting and Financial Management, and the American Journal of Public Health. Dr. Ward is a coauthor of one other book, Essentials of Cost Accounting for Health Care Organizations, 3rd Ed. (with Steven Finkler and Judith Baker).
There are several advantages to participatory budgeting. First, it strengthens de- mocracy. By creating a channel for citizens to give voice to their priorities, publicbudgeting thereby enhances the government’s credibility and the citizens’ trust. Second, it increases transparency in fiscal policy and public expenditure manage- ment by reducing scope for clientelistic practices, elite capture, and corruption. It also promotes social learning. By participating in the budget process the partici- pants acquire knowledge about budgetary politics, and the status of the commu- nity. Third, it produces a more effective allocation of resources. It can also impro- ve service delivery by linking needs identification, investment planning, tax sy- stems and project management. Publicbudgeting is instrumental in making the allocation of public resources more inclusive and equitable and thus promotes social justice. Fourth, it helps to build stronger communities. Through regular and enduring meetings citizens learn more about each other and develop stronger ties and lasting relationships. It can also improve social accountability. By deciding what projects to fund participants take a certain part of responsibility for the choi- ces (Cabannes, 2004; Lerner, 2011; World Bank, 2013).
The Dutch central government mainly uses a mixed cash/commitments system, but in 1994 it introduced the possibility for certain central government organizations to obtain the status of agency, implying that they have to apply an accrual accounting system. It followed up in 1997, by publishing a note entitled From Expenditure to Cost weighing advantages and drawbacks of an accrual accounting system. 20 Accounting on an accrual basis was considered to have additional merits. However, the economic and political conditions did not permit to make a comprehensive move to a new accounting system. Standardization of public spending on the basis of costs implies that cash expenditure can vary. Although costs may be equal to cash spending, this is not true in the case of investments. 21 A cash-based system recognizes investment at the date of spending, whereas an accrual-based system spreads the costs of investments over time (in the form of depreciation of assets). Given the 1997 deficit it seemed possible that ﬂuctuations in cash expenditure could result in a deficit exceeding the EMU accession criterion of three percent of GDP, which later on became one of the requirements of the EMU’s Stability and Growth Pact. By the early 2000s, however, the deficit had been considerably re- duced, thereby mitigating the risk of exceeding the EMU’s public deficit criterion.
As a regulatory body, the DFØ seeks to counteract the negative effects of an increasingly fragmented state that uses many different forms of accounting. However, the Ministry of Finance cautions: “The SSØ must balance consideration for direct profits through standardised common solutions with the need for customised solutions in the individual public enterprises” (Ministry of Finance 2009: 2). This is where risk assessment and risk management come into play. Integrated into general risk theory is the concept of vulnerability. In this context, vulnerability may be understood as the combination of business management and uncertainty with regard to a balanced budget, and it is taken for granted that the system is vulnerable. This means in practice that accrual-based business-oriented accounting should not be viewed only on the basis of the current situation, but also on the basis of complex conditions in the past and future. It is the task of the DFØ to assist institutions with this.
This course exposes students to concepts and principles underlying financial management; budgeting, accounting and reporting, procurement, and auditing in the Public sector-central, local and NGOs. It focuses on both conventional and contemporary financial management practices within the public sector environment
Brown, Waterhouse, & Flynn (2003) revealed that ideologically the introduction of private managerialis practices is contrary to the traditional public service ethos. The use of purely economic principles in caring profession is contrary and can undermine the values of their profession (Broadbent, Dietric, & Laughlin, 1996). School autonomy can change the purpose of educational process. Education is more political. Changes in managerial pattern can also change the focus of school. It also strongly influences teacher’s behavior. Education is no longer assessed in terms of the process, but based on reports of financial management and student’s final report (Broadbent & Laughlin, 1998). SBM is a real form of private management adoption and the theory that supports it to an educational institution (Mehralizadeh, Hossain, & Atashfeshan, 2006).
Despite the use of capital budgeting processes within the public sector entities, there are differences in the application for each stage of the process i.e., identification, selection, authorization, implementation & control and post audit stages. The problems range from political interference, lack of detailed planning of the project due to urgency of projects, implementation of project before the readiness assessments are done and poor monitoring by the public offices during implementation and post completion of capital investment projects. The lack of Supplier Management processes in the State Owned Entities was also highlighted as a gap where poor performing contractors find themselves back into the system while good performing contractors are not utilized more often and used to develop small and new contractors.
Since 1983 the Financial Management Improvement Program has been central to the reform program in Australia. Halligan (2009) argued that the FMIP dominated the reforms of the 1980s as an initiative designed to produce more efficient use of resources. FMIP is the product of a report on the efficiency and effectiveness of the civil service. A governmental inquiry committee was formed and John Reid chaired the Committee (Common Wealth of Australia, 1983). Reid believed that private sector management techniques could be used in government to improve the public sector (Zifcak, 1994). In the public sector, the leadership should be improved and managerial authority should be developed. Zifcak (1994) further argued that principles of accountable management should be introduced to ensure that performance was regularly evaluated against approved goals, strategies and priorities. The major components of the program were in the areas of forward estimates, the running costs system, portfolio budgeting and program management and budgeting (Ball, 1990; Holmes, 1990; Shand, 1990). Barton (2009) argued that the adoption of accrual accounting and budgeting systems was central to the program of Australian public sector financial management reform over the past 30 years. Halligan et al. (1992) claimed that FMIP was essentially an umbrella concept for a range of initiatives which involved a standard managerialist line-up: corporate and program management, corporate planning, program budgeting and performance evaluation. The program aimed to help managers to focus on „managing for results‟, rather than directing their efforts to inputs and processes in order to obtain greater resource efficiency and effectiveness (Shand, 1990; APSC, 2003).
According to NESP report (2015) the Kenyan government spends a lot of money in education compared to other sub Saharan African countries. This is to provide quality education and to make education accessible to every child. Therefore managers of various public institutions of learning are held accountable for all resources in their institutions as cited by (GOK, 2012). According to World Bank report (2008) the government has highly invested in Education in many African countries, though management capacity remains inefficiently developed. NESP (2015) report that there is still a gap in school management in Kenya as the organization and management structures in most schools and colleges are relatively weak. A study by Kimathi (2016) states that head teachers who attended training on financial management acquired skills and knowledge to carry out accounting practices and budgeting in Tharaka-Nithi County. These schools have adequate physical facilities and provision of teaching –learning materials. Igembe South and other sub-counties in Kenya have received a total of Kshs. 6621 billion for primary school development (GoK, 2005). A report from Igembe South Sub-County Director of Education (2013) indicates that four head teachers were demoted to classroom teachers due to mismanagement and misappropriation of funds. Igembe South is categorized as hardship zone (MOEST, 2005). From Table 1 some schools have semi-permanent buildings, and incomplete facilities. Apart from this, the sub county has been leading in Kenya Certificate of Primary School Examination (KCPE), but for the last three years the results have dropped (Sub-county Igembe South sub county 2017). Could it be that head teachers’ financial governance practices affect school development on infrastructures and performance in examination? This study therefore sought to fill the knowledge gap by investigating how financial governance practices used by head teacher influenced school development in public primary schools in Igembe South Sub County, Meru county Kenya
Big Data Policy, Private Regulation, Medical Self-Regulation, Transaction Cost Economics, Mandatory Spending and Entitlements, Institutional Economics, Wealth Transfers and Public Policy, Critical Research on Corporate Social Responsibility, Political Economy and US Policy, Propensity Score Matching, Budget Theory, Fiscal Policy
In spite of this doom and gloom, it is worth pointing out that the cuts outlined in the spending review will only bring public expenditure as a proportion of GDP back down to 2006-07 levels. Indeed, total managed expenditure is actually forecast to increase from £697bn to £740bn over the next four years. However, it is worth remembering that the Government will be spending far more on beneits and debt interest in 2015 than it did eight years previously – the annual debt interest bill alone will increase from £43bn to £63bn over the spending review period. This means there will be much less left for departments to spend on services. In addition, demographic changes will exacerbate the iscal squeeze, as the post war ‘baby boomer’ generation reaches 65 and an increase in school-age children places extra demands on schools. These points raise another, possibly more pertinent, issue: whether the ambitious proposals in the Spending Review can actually be delivered. For example, many of the proposals (such as slashing Whitehall administration budgets by a third) are lacking in detail as to how they can be achieved and could be described as unrealistic. Perhaps more importantly, governments in the 1970s and 1980s were met with widespread strikes and civil unrest when they tried to implement spending cuts that are modest in comparison to what the coalition is proposing. Since the 1950s, the Government has only achieved real-terms cuts of more than 1% in current public spending in two inancial years: 1977-78 (shortly after the International Monetary Fund intervened in the economy) and 1988-89 (at the height of the Lawson boom).Although reducing the level of inputs does not necessarily lead to poorer outputs and outcomes, cuts of this scale and speed will have a negative effect on services, at the very least in the short term. Unless the public is happy to settle for fewer services of lower quality – and there is little evidence to suggest that they have lowered their expectations – further protests from trades unions and citizens are inevitable. Prior to the spending review, the coalition had already incurred the wrath of various groups of people, including school leavers wanting to go to university, stay-at-home middle class mothers, public sector workers, and a large proportion of Liberal Democrat voters. Once the cuts begin to bite, others will no doubt join this list.
Changes and shifts that occur dynamically have created a critical mass, and one of consequence is the performance of government agencies become much criticism lately, especially since a very dynamic development of society and the emergence of a more democratic climate in the government. People have become more critical in assessing the implementation of public service and of course expect a good and fair implementation as well as other products and services quality. Only in practice, this expectation is not always met by the government, both at central and regional levels. Until now, there are still many cases of public service that is far from the expectations of society (Local Governance Support Program, 2009).
socialization; and/or (d) seminars, workshops, and/or discussions. This kind of spaces for participation, as opined by Ahmad et al. (2003), are still on the medium or pseudo-participation level, and they include the public’s informing and consulting. At that level of participation, there is no guarantee whether the public proposals are taken into account in the decision making process. There is no further provision on how many people are invited to participate, how do the public escort their ideas in the legal drafting process, and how do the government give budget support for public participation. Thus, the absence of such provisions has led to different interpretation and practice at each region. This problem was also stated by Tjandra and Darsono (2009: 71): “the provision does not regulate the way or method of implementing public participation in legal drafting process, so that the method in practices are based on their own interpretation and innovation.”