Keywords
How to Cite
Abstract
This paper examines why the performance information that governments produce so rarely shapes budget decisions and what bridges the gap. Drawing on OECD studies, public financial management (PEFA) assessments, executive surveys, legislator interviews and evidence from the United States federal budget, it shows that the gap is widespread but uneven, begins with thin coverage of the information itself, and persists because use is selective, political and weakly embedded in budget routines. The paper identifies three testable bridging channels, the credibility and coverage of performance information, the incentives and capacity of budget actors, and the integration of evidence into the budget cycle, and proposes how to test them on cross-country data.
References
1. Curristine, T., & Brown, D. (2018). Evidence and budgetary decision-making: Lessons from OECD countries. Paper presented at the APPAM Fall Research Conference, Washington, DC.
2. Gilmour, J. B., & Lewis, D. E. (2006a). Does performance budgeting work? An examination of the Office of Management and Budget’s PART scores. Public Administration Review, 66(5), 742–752.
3. Gilmour, J. B., & Lewis, D. E. (2006b). Assessing performance budgeting at OMB: The influence of politics, performance, and program size. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(2), 169–186.
4. Hammerschmid, G., Van de Walle, S., & Štimac, V. (2013). Internal and external use of performance information in public organizations: Results from an international survey. Public Money & Management, 33(4), 261–268.
5. Kroll, A. (2015). Drivers of performance information use: Systematic literature review and directions for future research. Public Performance & Management Review, 38(3), 459–486.
6. OECD. (2019). OECD good practices for performance budgeting. Paris: OECD Publishing.
7. OECD. (2024). OECD performance budgeting framework (GOV/SBO(2023)1/REV1, draft). Paris: OECD Public Governance Directorate.
8. PEFA. (2022). Global report on public financial management 2022. Washington, DC: PEFA Secretariat.
9. PEFA. (2024). Uzbekistan 2024: Public financial management performance report. Washington, DC: PEFA Secretariat.
10. Raudla, R. (2012). The use of performance information in budgetary decision-making by legislators: Is Estonia any different? Public Administration, 90(4), 1000–1015.
11. Schick, A. (2014). The metamorphoses of performance budgeting. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 13(2), 49–79.
12. Shaw, T. (2016). Performance budgeting practices and procedures. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 15(3), 65–136.
13. Wildavsky, A. (1964). The politics of the budgetary process. Boston: Little, Brown.