改进部门预算监督的对策

一、探索设计科学的标准体系，提高部门预算编制的预算审核绩效 实行部门预算后，已经明确要求取消传统的“基数＋增长”的编制方法，采用零基预算。但在实际执行中，由于缺乏科学合理的支出标准体系，许多预算单位仍没有严格按照零基预算的编制要求，预算编制带有明显的“基数＋增长”的痕迹。因此，为真正实现部门预算的目标，要求各预算单位严格按照零基预算的方式编制预算，其核心是对基本支出定额标准的确定和项目支出的绩效审核。     

企业全面预算管理研究

企业预算是企业各子公司或职能部门的年度财务目标,也是日常决策的指引,还是年终绩效考核的依据.预算的编制是整个预算管理体系的起点,预算的控制是整个预算管理体系的核心,起到纠正偏差、引向目标的作用。企业预算内容主要包括经营预算、财务预算及资本预算。企业预算编制的模式包括自上而下式、自下而上式及上下结合式,编制的方法包括弹性预算、固定预算、滚动预算、零基预算及作业基础预算等。由于每个企业规模、管理水平、所处的行业及发展阶段等不同,企业应选择适合自身的编制模式和编制方法。     

国外公共支出预算管理简介与借鉴

零基预算和绩效预算都是起源并推广于美国的一种预算方法，同时也是一种以追求效效益为目标的公共支出预算模式。     

美国两次绩效预算改革的启示

美国的公共预算真正开始于内战之后，并经历了线性预算、绩效预算、项目预算、零基预算和新绩效预算五次重大的预算改革。其中有两次是关于绩效预算的改革，回顾这两次改革的演进过程，可以使我们更加深刻地理解绩效预算的内涵，对完善我国的预算管理体系有很多有益的启示。     

零基预算对预算编制松弛的影响

零基预算是部门预算的主要编制模式,它从真实需求出发来确定支出预算。预算编制松弛是在编制支出预算时,有意高估支出,将支出预算确定在真实需求之上。本文基于部门预算的实证研究,从零基预算对预算编制松弛是否有显著影响这个角度,检验零基预算方法是否真正发挥作用。根据样本数据分析发现,零基预算对预算编制松弛无显著抑制作用,这个结果表明,我国的零基预算并未发挥其预期作用,部门预算改革还任重道远。     

对预算运行全过程的财政监督

财政预算是公共财政的重要组成部分,财政预算直接规定着政府部门的年度收支活动,政府的每一项收支活动都必须在年度预算中确定,都必须获得年度预算的认可,所以必须加强对财政预算编制、执行和决算的全过程的监督。1.编制财政预算的监督。对财政预算编制的监督主要是对预算编制的合法性、真实性和科学性进行监督。①合法性。预算制定程序是否合法,是否经过必要的编制、审核、批准程序;列入预算的部门、单位是否符合法律规定;列入预算的支出项目、内容标准是否符合法律、法规、规章;预算的支出结构是否符合国家法律法规等的规定。②真实性。就是要监督编制预     

预算绩效管理改革与行政事业单位财务管理模式的分析

随着预算绩效管理改革的实施,我国的财政预算管理发生了较大的变化.基于此,本文就预算绩效管理改革与行政事业单位财务管理模式展开分析,首先分析了在行政事业单位财务管理中预算绩效管理改革对预算管理、资产与负债管理的影响,进一步提出了行政事业单位财务管理模式的优化对策,包括构建完善的绩效评价指标体系、综合提升财务管理水平、强化财务管理中风险控制力度等.     

高等学校零基预算编制问题研究

零基预算近年来在我国得以推广,并取得一定成效。但是,由于预算环境和预算过程中各种不完善因素的存在,零基预算在我国高校财务预算编制中没有发挥根本性的作用。不少高校的财务预算编制采用的是一种形式上的零基预算加部门预算的预算编制模式。零基预算在我国高校的推行既需要政府的政策配套、协调合作,更需要高校改革现有的预算编制模式和预算管理模式,从而形成内外互动的良好的高校零基预算管理体系。     

关于高校实施绩效预算管理的若干思考

实行绩效预算是我国财政预算管理体制改革的目标之一.为做好实施绩效预算管理工作,从高校绩效预算管理现状分析入手,逐步深入,提出实施绩效预算管理的具体措施.     

部门预算与公共投资预算改革

当前部门预算编制中存在的问题有：现行预算科目设置不合理;预算支出标准不合理,经常性与非经常性支出范围不清;零基预算与法定支出和规定有矛盾;机构改革尚未到位;编制时间太迟。公共投资预算改革的难点是：市场经济尚未真正建立;公共财政基本框架尚处于构建之中;行政机构改革和事业单位精简尚未取得正进展;既得利益与预期利益的矛盾;法治化建设滞后的影响。编制部门预算将会推动我国现行财政基本建设支出预算的改革;编制部门预算要求改革我国现行财政投资管理制度,克服财政投资领域中存在的低效、浪费和腐败现象。     

Changes in Task Uncertainty Induced by Zero-Base Budgeting: Using the Thompson and Hirst Models to Predict Dysfunctional Behaviour

Generic budgeting systems such as PPBS and Zero-Based Budgeting (ZBB) are criticized by academics for failing to give consideration to some of the key variables affecting behaviour in budgeting endeavours. Despite this criticism, the literature has devoted little attention to modifications that can be made to make the systems more responsive to different configurations of organizational variables. This paper addresses this oversight in regard to ZBB. In particular the paper discusses ZBB within the context of two variables: (a) the degree of task uncertainty engendered by the system and (b) the character of performance measures used to evaluate units that employ ZBB. The paper argues that ZBB materially increases the degree of task uncertainty. Configured with the type of performance measures used to evaluate departments employing ZBB, the paper maintains that the increase in task uncertainty creates incentives to engage in dysfunctional behaviour, largely in the form of invalid data reporting. It is hypothesized that this problem may be responsible for the general failure of ZBB to lead to large budget re-allocations.     

论中国政府预算管理改革的优先序--兼议绩效预算在中国的适用性

绩效预算是西方国家实践证明了的先进的预算管理模式。但绩效预算的实行需要社会相关制度环境的配套。中国目前尚不具备实施绩效预算的基本条件。中国预算制度改革的当务之急是建立控制取向的预算管理模式,解决财务合规性问题。待相关条件具备后,再选择绩效预算管理模式。     

新绩效预算理论在高校预算中的运用

传统的绩效预算强调预算支出所导致的产出，新绩效预算则关注支出的最终结果。高校预算管理工作应以目标管理和部门预算为支柱，以畅通的信息传导与反馈渠道为保障，以协调发展的内生制度与外生制度为条件，构建效益分析框架和绩效预算管理的运行模式。     

中国公共预算改革的目标选择:近期目标与远期目标

本文运用凯顿的预算模式理论研究了中国公共预算改革的目标选择主要结论是,中国现阶段仍然应该以建立一种"控制取向"的现代公共预算体制为目标,中国预算改革的当务之急是将政治控制与行政控制纳入预算过程.最后,虽然新绩效预算是一种非常理想的预算模式,但是,中国目前并不具备实行的条件.即使对于实行新绩效预算来说,先实行一种"控制取向"的预算体制也是有帮助的.     

Zero-base budgeting: Prospects for developing a semi-confusing budgeting information system

This paper argues for the recognition that zero-base budgeting (ZBB) is a destabilizing process which may co-exist in the future with traditional budgeting systems (TBS) to form a semi-confusing information system. The stabilizing and destabilizing features of a semi-confusing information system are explored first. The characteristics of ZBB as a formal budgeting process are examined next to provide a comparative profile of its destabilizing features in a changing environment. Analytically, ZBB characteristics match with the destabilizing properties of a semi-confusing information system and this insight has substantial implications for the future use of ZBB.     

Relating Context Variables to Participative Budgeting and Evaluative Use of Performance Measures: A Meta‐analysis

Extant findings regarding how context variables relate to participative budgeting and the evaluative use of accounting performance measures (APM) are contradictory. Unlike previous reviews of such findings, this empirical article uses a meta‐analysis to examine the relations of context variables with participative budgeting or evaluative use of APM to determine (i) how the variables relate and (ii) which factors might cause between‐correlation variance, such as statistical artefacts or moderating influences of variable measures, sample selection, or industry differences. All meta‐analyses are based on rather small samples. Three groups of context variables emerge. First, some relate significantly and homogeneously to participative budgeting or evaluative use of APM; these direct relations should be considered explicitly in further studies. Second, for some variables, the relations are homogeneous but not significant, such that they are neither simple nor direct. Third, substantial variance exists in the correlations for some context variables; these relations are contingent on other influences. Industry differences and sample selection explain some inconsistencies in exploratory moderator analyses and should receive additional research attention.     

Budgeting in Catholic Parishes: An Exploratory Study

In this paper an aspect of accounting, namely budgeting, has been studied in an organizational context. According to Booth (1993) churches represent 'extreme cases' in which to study the impact of accounting. Following on from Laughlin (1988) Booth considered the sacred and secular divide to be a significant element in the use of accounting by church organizations. The parishes of the Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne form the context of this study in which evidence is sought for the sacred and secular divide by studying the role of budgeting in the parish. Questions were asked regarding participation in the budgetary process and the development and use of the budget. It was found that there was little consultation or participation in the budgetary process and that the use of the budget was restricted. These findings suggest that the sacred and secular divide operates at the parish level.     

Capital budgeting with multiple criteria and multiple decision makers

In this article, we propose a model that incorporates the preferences of multiple decision makers into a decison-making process using (1) The analytical hierarchy process (AHP); and (2) multiple criteria and multiple constraint levels (MC²) linear programming in a capital budgeting context. Our model can foster strategic and nonfinancial factors that are important in the capital budgeting problems of the current business environment. The two-phased solution framework proposed in this article is sufficiently flexible to reach a compromise among decision makers. Our method also facilitates collection of decision makers' preferences to minimize suboptimization of overall company's goals. In addition, application of AHP to derive weights to decision makers' preferences for resource availability decreases the solution complexity. All these characteristics represent a significant improvement compared with previous linear or goal programming approaches to capital budgeting problems.     

Testing Rival Theories of Budgetary Decision–making in the US States

This article tests three common budgetary decision–making theories in the US states. Pooled time series cross–section analysis is used from 1960 to 1996 to test the garbage can theory and incrementalism, and from 1989 to 1996 to test various theories of rational budgeting. The results demonstrate that there was some support for all three theories in terms of their impact on reducing state budget outputs. Rational budgeting reduces expenditures in aggregate, incrementalism has relatively low explanatory power below the aggregates, and garbage can budgeting is more prevalent in functional areas than for government as a whole. These findings imply that the future research agenda on budgetary decision–making theories should focus more on a system–wide approach, which takes into account many of the characteristics of all three rival models of decision–making, rather than exclusively focusing on each one singly.