The diffusion of performance budgeting into China asks the question: how may China approach this task? This research examines the experience of performance budgeting in the United States, and explores the desirability of a utilization-driven approach to implement performance budgeting in China. This article argues that, given what we have known from experiences in other countries, a utilization driven approach, an approach that means to design a performance measurement system that clearly identifies the users of information and the intended uses, holds the promise in China's unique historical, political and cultural environment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BehnR. D. (2003). Why Measure Performance? Different Purposes Require Different Measures.Public Administration Review, 63(5), 586–606.
2.
BurnsR. C. & LeeR. D.Jr. (2004). The Ups and Downs of State Budget Process Reform: Experience of Three Decades.Public Budgeting & Finance, 24(3), 1–19.
3.
CaidenN. (1981). Public Budgeting amidst Uncertainty and Instability.Public Budgeting & Finance, 11(1), 6–19.
DeanP. N. (1986). Assessing the Performance Budgeting Experiment in Four Developing Countries.Financial Accountability & Management, 2(1), 1–24.
6.
DouglasJ. W. (1999). Redirection in Georgia:ANew Type of Budget Reform.The American Review of Public Administration, 29(3), 269–289.
7.
EpsteinP. D. (1984). Using Performance Measurement in Local Government: A Guide to Improving Decisions, Performance, and Accountability. New York, NY:Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, Inc.
8.
GrizzleG. A. (2001). Performance Measures for Budget Justifications: Developing a Selection Strategy. In MillerG. J.HildrethW. B. & RabinJ. (Eds.), Performance-Based Budgeting (pp. 355–367). Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.
9.
HatryH. P. (1997). Where the Rubber Meets the Road: Performance Measurement for State and Local Public Agencies. In NewcomerK. E. (Ed.), Using Performance Measurement to Improve Public and Nonprofit Programs: New Directions for Evaluation (Vol. 75, pp. 31–44). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publisher.
10.
HeinrichC. (2002). Outcomes-Based Performance Management in the Public Sector: Implications for Government Accountability and Effectiveness.Public Administration Review, 62(6), 712–725.
11.
HouY.MaJ. & WuJ. (2005, June 15–17). Changing Roles of the Central Budget Agency in the Chinese Context of Performance-Based Budgeting. Paper presented at the Public Budgeting and Finance Reforms in Transitional China, Guangzhou, China.
12.
JoyceP. G. (1993). Using Performance Measures for Federal Budgeting: Proposals and Prospects.Public Budgeting & Finance, 13(4), 3–17.
13.
KluversR. (2001). An Analysis of Introducing Program Budgeting in Local Government.Public Budgeting & Finance, 21(2), 29–45.
14.
LauthT. P. (1978). Zero-Base Budgeting in Georgia State Government: Myth and Reality.Public Administration Review, 38(5), 420–430.
15.
LauthT. P. (1985). Performance Evaluation in the Georgia Budgetary Process.Public Budgeting & Finance, 5(1), 67–82.
16.
LauthT. P. (2004). Budget reform in the United States and the State of Georgia, Shih Hsin University, TaiPei, Taiwan, June 28, 2004.
17.
LauthT. P. & RiechS. (1979). Modifications in Georgia Zero-Base Budgeting Procedures. Midwest Review of Public Administration, 13(December), 225–238.
18.
LeeR. D.Jr. (1991). Developments in State Budgeting: Trends of Two Decades.Public Administration Review, 51, 254–262.
19.
LeeR. D.Jr. (1997). A Quarter Century of State Budgeting Practices.Public Administration Review, 57, 133–140.
20.
LeeR. D.Jr & BurnsR. C. (2000). Performance Measurement in State Budgeting: Advancement and Backsliding from 1990 to 1995.Public Budgeting & Finance, 20(Spring), 38–54.
21.
LeeR. D.Jr & StaffeldtR. (1977). Executive and Legislative Use of Policy Analysis in the State Budgeting Process: Survey Results.Policy Analysis, 3(3), 395–405.
22.
LindblomC. E. (1959). The Science of “Muddling Through”.Public Administration Review, 19(2), 79–88.
23.
LindblomC. E. (1979). Still Muddling, Not Yet Through.Public Administration Review, 39(6), 517–526.
24.
MaJ. (2006). Zero-Based Budgeting In China: Experiences of Hubei Province.Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting and Financial Management, 18(4).
25.
McNabR. M. & MeleseF. (2003). Implementing the GPRA: Examining the Prospects for Performance Budgeting in the Federal Government.Public Budgeting & Finance, 23(2), 73–95.
26.
MelkersJ. E. & WilloughbyK. G. (2004). Staying the Course: The Use of Performance Measurement in State Governments: IBM Center for the Business of Government.
27.
NewcomerK. E. (1997). Using Performance Measurement to Improve Programs. In NewcomerK. E. (Ed.), Using Performance Measurement to Improve Public and Nonprofit Programs: New Directions for Evaluation (Vol. 75, pp. 5–14). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publisher.
RobinsonM. & BrumbyJ. (2005). Does Performance Budgeting Work? An Analytical Review of the Empirical Literature (No. WP/05/210). Washington, DC:International Monetary Fund, IMF.
30.
SchickA. (1990). Budgeting for Results: Recent Developments in Five Industrialized Countries.Public Administration Review, 50(1).
31.
SchickA. (2001). Getting performance measures to measure up. In D. W. Forsythe (Ed.), Quicker, Better, Cheaper: Managing Performance in American Government (pp. 39–60). Albany, NY: The Rockefeller Institute Press.
WangX. (2000). Performance Measurement in Budgeting:AStudy of County Governments.Public Budgeting & Finance, 20(3), 102–118.
36.
WangX.ZhuQ. & PanL. (2005). Implementing a Performance-based Management System (with a Case Description of China Post).Chinese Public Administration3(1/2), 35–46.
37.
WhiteJ. (1994). (Almost) Nothing New Under the Sun: Why the Work of Budgeting Remains Incremental.Public Budgeting & Finance, 14(1), 113–134.
38.
WildavskyA. (1978). A Budget for all Seasons? Why the Traditional Budget Lasts.Public Administration Review, 38 (November-December), 501–509.
39.
WilliamsD. W. (2003). Measuring Government in the Early Twentieth Century.Public Administration Review, 63(6), 643–659.
