在我国推行绩效预算的理论与实践思考
|
摘要
作为新公共管理运动的核心组成部分,绩效预算改革为提高政府财政支出的效率,解决政府财政危机、管理危机和信任危机起到了重要的推动作用,成为世界上预算改革发展的国际趋势,并在西方发达国家进行了各具特色的探索与实践,也成为我国未来预算改革与发展的长期目标和方向。
1998年以来我国进行了部门预算改革、“收支两条线”管理改革、政府收支科目分类改革、国库集中收付改革、政府采购改革和金财工程建设。上述财政管理改革基本是投入控制取向的改革措施,对于克服过去财政资金管理混乱、资金使用不规范等问题起到了很好的作用。但随着预算投入控制取向改革的深入,人们发现仅仅控制投入,强调财政资金的合规性,并不能保证财政资金使用取得好的效果。绩效预算强调以结果为导向配置预算资源,有助于弥补我国单纯投入控制取向预算改革的不足,提高财政资金使用的有效性和政府公共支出管理水平。绩效预算改革对我国的预算管理制度改革具有重要的现实意义。
目前我国从中央到地方开始了许多绩效评价和绩效预算的改革试点,陆续成立了一些绩效评价的组织机构,初步建立了绩效评价指标体系,有的还进行了将评价结果应用于预算管理的尝试。但试点由于制度环境、传统预算管理观念、对绩效预算的认识等诸多因素的影响,很多方面从效果上看并不能令人满意,遇到了种种困惑和问题。这些问题有来自观念层面的、制度层面的也有来自技术层面的。如对绩效评价与绩效预算的关系,绩效预算与部门预算的关系,投入控制取向改革与绩效管理取向改革的关系,我国当前是否有条件建立绩效预算,如何将绩效评价与预算管理相结合,如何推进绩效预算等问题认识模糊,阻碍了绩效预算改革的进一步深入和发展。改革实践的发展,需要理论上进行创新和突破,对面临的种种问题进行研究和解答。
本文将从理论和实践两个方面对这一课题进行研究。论文先从理论分析入手,揭示绩效预算产生和发展的理论基础,绩效预算改革措施的理论逻辑,从理论层面为绩效预算改革建立理论指导。再将理论与实践相结合,侧重历史分析、实证分析,通过分析国内外绩效预算的历史沿革的各个改革阶段,改革的思路及成败的分析,对国外绩效预算的理论演变和实践发展进行了梳理和归纳总结,对国内绩效预算存在的矛盾和问题进行了剖析。最后结合中国预算管理现状,对困扰绩效预算理论研究和实践的争论和矛盾,改革中遇到的难点和困惑,尝试给出解答和澄清,并指出符合中国实际情况的绩效预算改革方向和路径选择。最后,论文选择北京市绩效预算改革实践作为案例分析,研究了北京市绩效预算改革现状,主要的制度框架结构,面临的主要问题,并给出了今后进一步完善绩效预算改革的政策建议。
论文的主要创新点包括：
论文提出目前我国投入控制取向预算改革与绩效管理取向预算改革应并行的观点,指出投入控制取向预算改革是绩效管理取向预算改革的基础,我国应进一步完善而不是放松投入控制取向预算改革进程。在加强支出控制的同时积极推进绩效预算改革,使得两种预算改革相互促进,相互完善。
论文提出要将行政事业单位的国有资产管理与绩效预算管理相结合。我国虽然没有进行权责发生制的政府会计改革,无法进行全成本预算管理,但我国可以通过加强行政事业单位的国有资产管理并将其与绩效预算管理相结合,弥补现金收付制会计制度的缺陷,以更好地进行支出的成本效益分析和预算资源配置。
论文研究了如何将部门预算改革与绩效预算改革相衔接的问题,提出在部门预算基础上进行绩效预算改革的观点。
论文分析了绩效评价与绩效预算的关系问题。指出绩效评价只是绩效预算的一个重要组成部分,但远不是绩效预算的全部。将绩效评价当作绩效预算的全部,忽视了绩效评价之外的部分,会造成对绩效预算理解的偏颇。在绩效预算改革实践中绩效评价单兵突进,其它部分改革相对滞后,最终会阻碍绩效预算改革的顺利进行。
论文分析了绩效评价的作用、局限以及面临的挑战。.指出如果将绩效评价结果机械地强加于预算决策,有时不仅不会提高预算的绩效管理水平,可能还会产生一连串的副作用,遭到预算资金使用部门的抵制与强烈反弹,最终导致绩效预算改革的失败。绩效评价结果与预算的结合需要慎重,采取实事求是的态度。从目前管理水平和技术条件看,至少在一个较长的阶段不可过分拔高绩效评价结果在资源分配中的作用,更不要在绩效评价结果和资金分配之间去建立简单机械的联系。
绩效预算首先要明确政府的职责,才能确定政府的绩效目标。政府绩效目标的清晰是设定绩效评价指标和进行预算资源有效分配的关键。政府的职责的明确需要进行公共管理体制改革。论文提出要将绩效预算与政府职能转变联系起来,要在五年计划的基础上,建立政府战略目标和多年滚动预算并将其作为绩效预算体系的一个有机组成部分。论文对绩效预算的各个有机组成部分、关键环节进行了研究,得出了我国实行绩效预算的路径选择。
As the key part of the new public management movement, performance budget (PB) benefit a lot to the enhancement of the public expenditure efficiency, settlement of the government finance, management and entrustment crisis. PB has become the world trend of the budget reform and it is also become the long term target of Chinese budget reform.
From 1998 china began the reforms of the department budget, two lines of revenue and expenditure, governmental revenue and expenditure classified, treasury consol idated receipts and payments system, government procurement, and monetary and financial project. But basically all the reforms above are control oriented; they are helpful to overcome the problems of finance management chaos and not standardized use of funds. With the deep process of the control oriented reform, people found that only the standardized use of funds can't guarantee the good efficiency of the government expenditure. PB emphasizes the outcome oriented allocation of funds, it will do good to make up the shortcoming of the control oriented reform and improve the effectiveness of government expenditure. So the PB has important meaning to Chinese budget system reform.
China has began a lot of performance evaluation and PB pilot reforms, and established some organization of performance evaluation, preliminaryly set up the system of index of evaluation. Some even attempted the applicat ion of the result of the performance evaluation. But from many aspects of the attempts, they are not satisfied because of the system environments, traditional budget management idea, and understanding of the PB. People are confused about how to dea I with the relationship of the performance eva I uat ion and PB,the relationship of PB and department budget,the relationship of control oriented reform and outcome oriented reform, do we have the condition to apply PB, how to combine the performance evaluation and budget,how to apply PB. The confusion of these issues counteract the reform the PB. The development of PB practices needs the theory innovation and gives answers to these issues.
This paper will carry out research from theory and practice aspects. Paper will begin from the theory ana I yze, show the theory foundation the PB development and theory logic of the PB reform, and set up the theory instruction of the PB reform. Then combine the theory and practice,analyze each phase of the PB reform, the problems accured, summarize the thought of the reform and the success or failure of the reform to give answers to the issues mentioned above. In the last chapter of the paper we will analyze the case of the Be i j i ng PB reform i nc I ud i ng the situation of the PB reform, the main frame of the PB system of Beijing, the problems faced, and give some suggestions to the ongoing PB reform of Beijing.
The main innovation of the paper including:
The research of the paper suggests that we should carry out the control oriented budget reform and the outcome oriented budget reform simultaneously. It is pointed out that the control oriented budget is the foundation of the outcome oriented budget. According to the situation in china, we should enhance the reform of the control oriented budget instead of loosening it. Improve the PB reform meanwhile strengthening the control, and let the two budget reforms benefit each other.
It is suggested that we should combine the administrative institutions asset management and the PB reform. Although china has not applied the accounting on the accrual basis and manage the budget on all cost, but china can strengthen the administrative institutions asset management and combine it to PB reform to make up the shortcoming of the accounting on the cash basis and improve the allocation of the budget recourses.
Paper researches how to I ink up the department budget reform and PB reform, and points out that we should set up the PB reform on the foundation of the department reform.
Paper analyzes the relationship of the performance evaluation and PB. It is pointed out that the performance evaluation is only the important part of the PB, but not all of PB. If we ignore the rest part If PB, we may misunderstand PB and let the rest part of PB reform get behind and at last baffle the reform of PB.
Paper analyzes the function, shortcoming and chal lenge faced of performance evaluation, points out that if we combine the result of the performance evaluation to the process of budget improprietly, we may face the strong resistance from the government department and the final failure of the PB reform. So we should be very conscious and realistic while combine the performance evaluation to PB. According to the technical situation in china, there is a long way to go.
We shou I d make c I ear the functions of the government i n the first place while applying PB. By doing so, we can set clearly the target of the government. The clear target of the government is the key foundation to set up the performance evaluation index and the allocation of the budget resource. We should carry out the public administration system reform. It is pointed out that we should link up the PB and the government function transform. Government should set up the strategic target and the continuous budgeting, and let them be the important part of the PB. Paper researches the segments and taches of the PB and points out how to apply PB step by step.
1998年以来我国进行了部门预算改革、“收支两条线”管理改革、政府收支科目分类改革、国库集中收付改革、政府采购改革和金财工程建设。上述财政管理改革基本是投入控制取向的改革措施,对于克服过去财政资金管理混乱、资金使用不规范等问题起到了很好的作用。但随着预算投入控制取向改革的深入,人们发现仅仅控制投入,强调财政资金的合规性,并不能保证财政资金使用取得好的效果。绩效预算强调以结果为导向配置预算资源,有助于弥补我国单纯投入控制取向预算改革的不足,提高财政资金使用的有效性和政府公共支出管理水平。绩效预算改革对我国的预算管理制度改革具有重要的现实意义。
目前我国从中央到地方开始了许多绩效评价和绩效预算的改革试点,陆续成立了一些绩效评价的组织机构,初步建立了绩效评价指标体系,有的还进行了将评价结果应用于预算管理的尝试。但试点由于制度环境、传统预算管理观念、对绩效预算的认识等诸多因素的影响,很多方面从效果上看并不能令人满意,遇到了种种困惑和问题。这些问题有来自观念层面的、制度层面的也有来自技术层面的。如对绩效评价与绩效预算的关系,绩效预算与部门预算的关系,投入控制取向改革与绩效管理取向改革的关系,我国当前是否有条件建立绩效预算,如何将绩效评价与预算管理相结合,如何推进绩效预算等问题认识模糊,阻碍了绩效预算改革的进一步深入和发展。改革实践的发展,需要理论上进行创新和突破,对面临的种种问题进行研究和解答。
本文将从理论和实践两个方面对这一课题进行研究。论文先从理论分析入手,揭示绩效预算产生和发展的理论基础,绩效预算改革措施的理论逻辑,从理论层面为绩效预算改革建立理论指导。再将理论与实践相结合,侧重历史分析、实证分析,通过分析国内外绩效预算的历史沿革的各个改革阶段,改革的思路及成败的分析,对国外绩效预算的理论演变和实践发展进行了梳理和归纳总结,对国内绩效预算存在的矛盾和问题进行了剖析。最后结合中国预算管理现状,对困扰绩效预算理论研究和实践的争论和矛盾,改革中遇到的难点和困惑,尝试给出解答和澄清,并指出符合中国实际情况的绩效预算改革方向和路径选择。最后,论文选择北京市绩效预算改革实践作为案例分析,研究了北京市绩效预算改革现状,主要的制度框架结构,面临的主要问题,并给出了今后进一步完善绩效预算改革的政策建议。
论文的主要创新点包括：
论文提出目前我国投入控制取向预算改革与绩效管理取向预算改革应并行的观点,指出投入控制取向预算改革是绩效管理取向预算改革的基础,我国应进一步完善而不是放松投入控制取向预算改革进程。在加强支出控制的同时积极推进绩效预算改革,使得两种预算改革相互促进,相互完善。
论文提出要将行政事业单位的国有资产管理与绩效预算管理相结合。我国虽然没有进行权责发生制的政府会计改革,无法进行全成本预算管理,但我国可以通过加强行政事业单位的国有资产管理并将其与绩效预算管理相结合,弥补现金收付制会计制度的缺陷,以更好地进行支出的成本效益分析和预算资源配置。
论文研究了如何将部门预算改革与绩效预算改革相衔接的问题,提出在部门预算基础上进行绩效预算改革的观点。
论文分析了绩效评价与绩效预算的关系问题。指出绩效评价只是绩效预算的一个重要组成部分,但远不是绩效预算的全部。将绩效评价当作绩效预算的全部,忽视了绩效评价之外的部分,会造成对绩效预算理解的偏颇。在绩效预算改革实践中绩效评价单兵突进,其它部分改革相对滞后,最终会阻碍绩效预算改革的顺利进行。
论文分析了绩效评价的作用、局限以及面临的挑战。.指出如果将绩效评价结果机械地强加于预算决策,有时不仅不会提高预算的绩效管理水平,可能还会产生一连串的副作用,遭到预算资金使用部门的抵制与强烈反弹,最终导致绩效预算改革的失败。绩效评价结果与预算的结合需要慎重,采取实事求是的态度。从目前管理水平和技术条件看,至少在一个较长的阶段不可过分拔高绩效评价结果在资源分配中的作用,更不要在绩效评价结果和资金分配之间去建立简单机械的联系。
绩效预算首先要明确政府的职责,才能确定政府的绩效目标。政府绩效目标的清晰是设定绩效评价指标和进行预算资源有效分配的关键。政府的职责的明确需要进行公共管理体制改革。论文提出要将绩效预算与政府职能转变联系起来,要在五年计划的基础上,建立政府战略目标和多年滚动预算并将其作为绩效预算体系的一个有机组成部分。论文对绩效预算的各个有机组成部分、关键环节进行了研究,得出了我国实行绩效预算的路径选择。
As the key part of the new public management movement, performance budget (PB) benefit a lot to the enhancement of the public expenditure efficiency, settlement of the government finance, management and entrustment crisis. PB has become the world trend of the budget reform and it is also become the long term target of Chinese budget reform.
From 1998 china began the reforms of the department budget, two lines of revenue and expenditure, governmental revenue and expenditure classified, treasury consol idated receipts and payments system, government procurement, and monetary and financial project. But basically all the reforms above are control oriented; they are helpful to overcome the problems of finance management chaos and not standardized use of funds. With the deep process of the control oriented reform, people found that only the standardized use of funds can't guarantee the good efficiency of the government expenditure. PB emphasizes the outcome oriented allocation of funds, it will do good to make up the shortcoming of the control oriented reform and improve the effectiveness of government expenditure. So the PB has important meaning to Chinese budget system reform.
China has began a lot of performance evaluation and PB pilot reforms, and established some organization of performance evaluation, preliminaryly set up the system of index of evaluation. Some even attempted the applicat ion of the result of the performance evaluation. But from many aspects of the attempts, they are not satisfied because of the system environments, traditional budget management idea, and understanding of the PB. People are confused about how to dea I with the relationship of the performance eva I uat ion and PB,the relationship of PB and department budget,the relationship of control oriented reform and outcome oriented reform, do we have the condition to apply PB, how to combine the performance evaluation and budget,how to apply PB. The confusion of these issues counteract the reform the PB. The development of PB practices needs the theory innovation and gives answers to these issues.
This paper will carry out research from theory and practice aspects. Paper will begin from the theory ana I yze, show the theory foundation the PB development and theory logic of the PB reform, and set up the theory instruction of the PB reform. Then combine the theory and practice,analyze each phase of the PB reform, the problems accured, summarize the thought of the reform and the success or failure of the reform to give answers to the issues mentioned above. In the last chapter of the paper we will analyze the case of the Be i j i ng PB reform i nc I ud i ng the situation of the PB reform, the main frame of the PB system of Beijing, the problems faced, and give some suggestions to the ongoing PB reform of Beijing.
The main innovation of the paper including:
The research of the paper suggests that we should carry out the control oriented budget reform and the outcome oriented budget reform simultaneously. It is pointed out that the control oriented budget is the foundation of the outcome oriented budget. According to the situation in china, we should enhance the reform of the control oriented budget instead of loosening it. Improve the PB reform meanwhile strengthening the control, and let the two budget reforms benefit each other.
It is suggested that we should combine the administrative institutions asset management and the PB reform. Although china has not applied the accounting on the accrual basis and manage the budget on all cost, but china can strengthen the administrative institutions asset management and combine it to PB reform to make up the shortcoming of the accounting on the cash basis and improve the allocation of the budget recourses.
Paper researches how to I ink up the department budget reform and PB reform, and points out that we should set up the PB reform on the foundation of the department reform.
Paper analyzes the relationship of the performance evaluation and PB. It is pointed out that the performance evaluation is only the important part of the PB, but not all of PB. If we ignore the rest part If PB, we may misunderstand PB and let the rest part of PB reform get behind and at last baffle the reform of PB.
Paper analyzes the function, shortcoming and chal lenge faced of performance evaluation, points out that if we combine the result of the performance evaluation to the process of budget improprietly, we may face the strong resistance from the government department and the final failure of the PB reform. So we should be very conscious and realistic while combine the performance evaluation to PB. According to the technical situation in china, there is a long way to go.
We shou I d make c I ear the functions of the government i n the first place while applying PB. By doing so, we can set clearly the target of the government. The clear target of the government is the key foundation to set up the performance evaluation index and the allocation of the budget resource. We should carry out the public administration system reform. It is pointed out that we should link up the PB and the government function transform. Government should set up the strategic target and the continuous budgeting, and let them be the important part of the PB. Paper researches the segments and taches of the PB and points out how to apply PB step by step.
引文
[1]董大胜,政府绩效评价体系,第一版,大连出版社,2005
[2]刘坤,绩效预算：国外经验与借鉴,第一版,中国财政经济出版社,2007
[3]刘旭涛,政府绩效管理制度、战略与方法,第一版,机械工业出版社,2003
[4]马国贤,政府绩效管理,第一版,复旦大学出版社,2005
[5]杨雄胜,政府绩效评价体系,第一版,大连出版社,2005
[6]C.V布朗,P.M.杰克逊,公共部门经济学,第一版,中国人民大学出版,2000
[7]E.s.萨瓦斯,民营化与公私部门的伙伴关系,第一版,中国人民大学出版,2002
[8]菲利普·G乔伊斯,基于绩效的预算：公共预算经典—面向绩效的新发展,第一版,上海财经大学出版社,2005
[9]国际货币基金组织,财政透明度,第一版,人民出版社,2001
[10]哈维·罗森,财政学,第一版,中国人民大学出版社,2000
[11]简·埃里克·莱恩,公共部门：概念、模型与途径,第一版,经济科学出版社,2004
[12]柯武刚,史漫飞,制度经济学,第一版,商务印书馆,2003
[13]马克·G波波维奇,创建高绩效政府组织,第一版,中国人民大学出版社,2002
[14]帕特里夏·基利,公共部门标杆管理,第一版,中国人民大学出版社,2002
[15]约瑟夫·斯蒂格利茨,公共部门经济学,第一版,中国人民大学出版社,2005
[16]詹姆斯·威尔逊,官僚机构：政府机构的作为及其原因,第一版,三联书社,2006
[17]常建娥,蒋太立,层次分析法确定权重的研究,武汉理工大学学报,2007(1)
[18]陈工,英美澳新等国家实施绩效预算的改革及其对我国的启示,财政研究,2006(1)
[19]常丽,绩效预算改革与政府成本会计的构建,财政研究,2009(1)
[20]陈建明,关于中国实施绩效管理的障碍性分析,中国行政管理,2005(11)
[21]陈尘肇,中国绩效审计研究与实践现状,财政研究,2009(7)
[22]顾杰,论我国行政问责职的现状与完善,理论月刊,2004(12)
[23]韩剑琴,行政问责制—建立责任政府的新探索[J],探索与争鸣,2004(8)
[24]霍素军,财政支出绩效评价初探,财政监督,2007(10)
[25]罗辉,改善和提高公共部门绩效的会计使命—关于建立公共部门管理会计的基本思 考,会计研究,2006(3)
[26]刘宇,预算绩效评价与预算支出管理改革衔接问题探悉,地方财政研究,2009(4)
[27]宋涛,行政问责概念及内涵辨析,深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),2005(3)
[28]宋芳秀,绩效预算改革的试点经验与发展对策,财政研究,2009(1)
[29]王余秀,我国公共支出绩效评价问题的解决之道,财政监督,2007(10)
[30]王东伟,制度创新：现代预算管理制度建设的重要引擎,财政研究,2009(10)
[31]王文杰,制度创新是深化我国财政资金绩效评价改革的关键,财政研究,2007(1)
[32]王继成,胡文秦,中国预算制度史评述及对我国预算改革的启示,中南财经政法大学研究生学报,2006(4)
[33]王进杰,贾英姿,政府绩效预算改革研究,财政研究,2006(8)
[34]王剑,张黎群,官僚预算最大化理论对提高财政预算效率的启示,财政研究,2009(8)
[35]徐元善,楚德江,绩效管理：行政问责制的新发展,理论月刊,2007(11)
[36]徐进,强化预算约束提高财政资金使用效益问题研究,财政研究,2009(1)
[37]姚凤民,财政支出绩效评价：国际比较与借鉴,财政研究,2006(8)
[38]杨玉霞,王东伟,辽宁政府预算绩效评价体系构建及实证分析,地方财政研究,2009(5)
[39]张琦,论绩效评价导向政府会计体系的构建,会计研究,2006(4)
[40]朱桂丽,对我国公共支出绩效评价体系的探讨,财政监督,2007(7)
[41]张定安,平衡计分卡与公共部门绩效管理,中国行政管理,2004(6).
[42]张维平,对中国实行绩效预算管理的思考,当代财经,2005(2)
[43]张馨,袁星侯,绩效预算改革探析,财政研究,2005(10)
[44]张恒龙,完善政绩考核体系,规范地方政府行为,地方财政研究,2009(5)
[45]郑钢,我国财政预算绩效指标的构建,争鸣与探索,2006(7)
[46]邓淑莲,于洪,马国贤,关于中国预算法修订的若干重大问题研究,财政研究,2009(9)
[47]陈穗红,以产出和成果为导向的预算管理改革国际经验,财政形势与政策研究文集,中国财政经济出版社出版,2003
[48]龙朝双等,试论层次分析法(AHP)在公共部门绩效考核指标权重确定中的运用,中国行政管理学会2007年年会论文集,2007
[49]马国贤,我国绩效指标体系建设研究,上海财经大学公共支出绩效管理研讨会论文集,上海：上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,2007
[50]王义峰,浅析我国绩效预算管理中存在的问题及对策,上海财经大学公共支出绩效管理研讨会论文集,上海：上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,2007
[51]吴俊培,绩效预算研究,上海财经大学公共支出绩效管理研讨会论文集,上海：上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,2007
[52]中国教育支出绩效评价(研究)中心,义务教育财政支出绩效评价试点研究报告上海财经大学公共支出绩效管理研讨会论文集,上海：上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,2007
[53]中国教育支出绩效评价(研究)中心,本科教学评估与高教支出绩效评价比较分析,上海财经大学公共支出绩效管理研讨会论文集,上海：上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,2007
[54]华燕玲,我国政府预算支出反馈机制缺失及预算绩效评价研究,电子科技大学硕士论文,2007
[55]郑毅,绩效预算制度研究,华中科技大学博士论文,2008
[56]彭健,政府预算理论演进与制度创新,东北财经大学博士论文,2005
[57]Borcherding, TE, Budgets and Bureaucrats:The Sources of Governmental Growth, Durham,NC:Durke University Press,1977
[58]Congressional Budget Office, Using Performance Measures in the Federal Budget Process, Washington, D. C:Government Printing Office,1993
[59]Ammons, David N, Overcoming the Inadequacies of Performance Measurement in Local Government: The Case of Libraries and Leisure Services. Public Administration Review 55(1),1995.
[60]Baker, W.M., Understanding Activity-Based Costing, Industrial Management 36,1994,
[61]Crain, W.M. and Brain, J. O'Roark, The impact of performance-based budgeting on state fiscal performan ce, Economics of Governance,2004(5)
[62]Coplin, William D, Astrid E. Merger, and Caroryn Bourdeaux., the Professional researcher as Change Agent in the Government-Performance Movement, Public Administration Review 62(6),2002.
[63]Caves, D.Wand Laurits, R. C, The Relative Efficiency of Public and Private Firms in a Competitive Enviomment: The case of Canadian Railroads, Journal of Political Economy 88, no.5 (10) 1980
[64]David N, Charles Coe, and Michael Lombardo, Performance-Comparison Projects in Local Government: Participants' Perspectives, Public Administration Review 61(1),2001.
[65]DongSung Kong., Performance-Based Budgeting:The U.S.Experience, Public Organization Review:A Global Journal 5,2005
[66]Frank, AS., Assumptions Underlying Performance-Based Budgeting, Tertiary Education and Management 5,1999
[67]Frank, AS, Assumptions Underlying Performance-Based Budgeting, Tertiary Education and Management 5,1999.
[68]Jack Diamond, From Program to Performance Budgeting:The Challenge for Emerging Market Economics, IMF Working Paper,2003
[69]Kopczynski, Mary, and Michael Lombardo, Comparative Performance Measurement: Insights and Lessons Learned from a Consortium Effort, Public Administration Review 59(2),1999
[70]Kelman, S, Procurement and Public Management: The Fear of Discretion and the Quality of Public Performance, Washington, D.C:AEI Press,1990
[71]Miller, GJ, Productivity and the Budget Process, In.Holzer, Public Productivity Handbook, New York:Dekker,1992
[72]Melkers, Julia E., and Katherine G Willoughby., The State of the States:Performance-Based Budgeting Requirements in 47 out of 50, Public Administration Review 58(1),1998
[73]Melkers, J.E., and Katherine G. Performance-Budgeting Systems:Willoughby. Distinction Budgeters Views of Branches, State Public Administration Review 61(1),2001
[74]McNab, Robert, M., and Francois Melese., Implementing the GPRA Examining the Prospects for Performance Budgeting in the Federal Government, Public Budgeting & Finance 23(2),2003
[75]Piotrowski, Suzanne, J.and Rosenbloom, D.H., Nonmission-Based Values inResults-Oriented Public Manent: The Case of Freedom of Informtion, PublicAdministration Review 62(6),2002
[76]Radin, Beryl A., The Government Performance and Results Act and the Tradition ofFederal Management Reform: Square Pegs in Round Holes, Journal of PublicAdministration Research and Theory 10(1),2000
[77]Stiefel, Leanna, Ross Rubenstein, and Amy Ellen Schwartz, Using AdjustedPerformance Measwes for Evaluating Resowce Use, Public Budgeting & Finance 19(3),1999
[78]Teresa Curristine, Zsuzsanna Lonti and Isabelle Joumard, Improving Public Sector Efciency: Challenges and Opportunities, OECD Journal on Budgeting, V7-No.1,2007
[79]Williams, Clif, and Ward Melhuish., Is ABCM Destined for Success or Failure in the Federal Government, Public Budgeting&Finance 19(2),1999
[2]刘坤,绩效预算：国外经验与借鉴,第一版,中国财政经济出版社,2007
[3]刘旭涛,政府绩效管理制度、战略与方法,第一版,机械工业出版社,2003
[4]马国贤,政府绩效管理,第一版,复旦大学出版社,2005
[5]杨雄胜,政府绩效评价体系,第一版,大连出版社,2005
[6]C.V布朗,P.M.杰克逊,公共部门经济学,第一版,中国人民大学出版,2000
[7]E.s.萨瓦斯,民营化与公私部门的伙伴关系,第一版,中国人民大学出版,2002
[8]菲利普·G乔伊斯,基于绩效的预算：公共预算经典—面向绩效的新发展,第一版,上海财经大学出版社,2005
[9]国际货币基金组织,财政透明度,第一版,人民出版社,2001
[10]哈维·罗森,财政学,第一版,中国人民大学出版社,2000
[11]简·埃里克·莱恩,公共部门：概念、模型与途径,第一版,经济科学出版社,2004
[12]柯武刚,史漫飞,制度经济学,第一版,商务印书馆,2003
[13]马克·G波波维奇,创建高绩效政府组织,第一版,中国人民大学出版社,2002
[14]帕特里夏·基利,公共部门标杆管理,第一版,中国人民大学出版社,2002
[15]约瑟夫·斯蒂格利茨,公共部门经济学,第一版,中国人民大学出版社,2005
[16]詹姆斯·威尔逊,官僚机构：政府机构的作为及其原因,第一版,三联书社,2006
[17]常建娥,蒋太立,层次分析法确定权重的研究,武汉理工大学学报,2007(1)
[18]陈工,英美澳新等国家实施绩效预算的改革及其对我国的启示,财政研究,2006(1)
[19]常丽,绩效预算改革与政府成本会计的构建,财政研究,2009(1)
[20]陈建明,关于中国实施绩效管理的障碍性分析,中国行政管理,2005(11)
[21]陈尘肇,中国绩效审计研究与实践现状,财政研究,2009(7)
[22]顾杰,论我国行政问责职的现状与完善,理论月刊,2004(12)
[23]韩剑琴,行政问责制—建立责任政府的新探索[J],探索与争鸣,2004(8)
[24]霍素军,财政支出绩效评价初探,财政监督,2007(10)
[25]罗辉,改善和提高公共部门绩效的会计使命—关于建立公共部门管理会计的基本思 考,会计研究,2006(3)
[26]刘宇,预算绩效评价与预算支出管理改革衔接问题探悉,地方财政研究,2009(4)
[27]宋涛,行政问责概念及内涵辨析,深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),2005(3)
[28]宋芳秀,绩效预算改革的试点经验与发展对策,财政研究,2009(1)
[29]王余秀,我国公共支出绩效评价问题的解决之道,财政监督,2007(10)
[30]王东伟,制度创新：现代预算管理制度建设的重要引擎,财政研究,2009(10)
[31]王文杰,制度创新是深化我国财政资金绩效评价改革的关键,财政研究,2007(1)
[32]王继成,胡文秦,中国预算制度史评述及对我国预算改革的启示,中南财经政法大学研究生学报,2006(4)
[33]王进杰,贾英姿,政府绩效预算改革研究,财政研究,2006(8)
[34]王剑,张黎群,官僚预算最大化理论对提高财政预算效率的启示,财政研究,2009(8)
[35]徐元善,楚德江,绩效管理：行政问责制的新发展,理论月刊,2007(11)
[36]徐进,强化预算约束提高财政资金使用效益问题研究,财政研究,2009(1)
[37]姚凤民,财政支出绩效评价：国际比较与借鉴,财政研究,2006(8)
[38]杨玉霞,王东伟,辽宁政府预算绩效评价体系构建及实证分析,地方财政研究,2009(5)
[39]张琦,论绩效评价导向政府会计体系的构建,会计研究,2006(4)
[40]朱桂丽,对我国公共支出绩效评价体系的探讨,财政监督,2007(7)
[41]张定安,平衡计分卡与公共部门绩效管理,中国行政管理,2004(6).
[42]张维平,对中国实行绩效预算管理的思考,当代财经,2005(2)
[43]张馨,袁星侯,绩效预算改革探析,财政研究,2005(10)
[44]张恒龙,完善政绩考核体系,规范地方政府行为,地方财政研究,2009(5)
[45]郑钢,我国财政预算绩效指标的构建,争鸣与探索,2006(7)
[46]邓淑莲,于洪,马国贤,关于中国预算法修订的若干重大问题研究,财政研究,2009(9)
[47]陈穗红,以产出和成果为导向的预算管理改革国际经验,财政形势与政策研究文集,中国财政经济出版社出版,2003
[48]龙朝双等,试论层次分析法(AHP)在公共部门绩效考核指标权重确定中的运用,中国行政管理学会2007年年会论文集,2007
[49]马国贤,我国绩效指标体系建设研究,上海财经大学公共支出绩效管理研讨会论文集,上海：上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,2007
[50]王义峰,浅析我国绩效预算管理中存在的问题及对策,上海财经大学公共支出绩效管理研讨会论文集,上海：上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,2007
[51]吴俊培,绩效预算研究,上海财经大学公共支出绩效管理研讨会论文集,上海：上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,2007
[52]中国教育支出绩效评价(研究)中心,义务教育财政支出绩效评价试点研究报告上海财经大学公共支出绩效管理研讨会论文集,上海：上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,2007
[53]中国教育支出绩效评价(研究)中心,本科教学评估与高教支出绩效评价比较分析,上海财经大学公共支出绩效管理研讨会论文集,上海：上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,2007
[54]华燕玲,我国政府预算支出反馈机制缺失及预算绩效评价研究,电子科技大学硕士论文,2007
[55]郑毅,绩效预算制度研究,华中科技大学博士论文,2008
[56]彭健,政府预算理论演进与制度创新,东北财经大学博士论文,2005
[57]Borcherding, TE, Budgets and Bureaucrats:The Sources of Governmental Growth, Durham,NC:Durke University Press,1977
[58]Congressional Budget Office, Using Performance Measures in the Federal Budget Process, Washington, D. C:Government Printing Office,1993
[59]Ammons, David N, Overcoming the Inadequacies of Performance Measurement in Local Government: The Case of Libraries and Leisure Services. Public Administration Review 55(1),1995.
[60]Baker, W.M., Understanding Activity-Based Costing, Industrial Management 36,1994,
[61]Crain, W.M. and Brain, J. O'Roark, The impact of performance-based budgeting on state fiscal performan ce, Economics of Governance,2004(5)
[62]Coplin, William D, Astrid E. Merger, and Caroryn Bourdeaux., the Professional researcher as Change Agent in the Government-Performance Movement, Public Administration Review 62(6),2002.
[63]Caves, D.Wand Laurits, R. C, The Relative Efficiency of Public and Private Firms in a Competitive Enviomment: The case of Canadian Railroads, Journal of Political Economy 88, no.5 (10) 1980
[64]David N, Charles Coe, and Michael Lombardo, Performance-Comparison Projects in Local Government: Participants' Perspectives, Public Administration Review 61(1),2001.
[65]DongSung Kong., Performance-Based Budgeting:The U.S.Experience, Public Organization Review:A Global Journal 5,2005
[66]Frank, AS., Assumptions Underlying Performance-Based Budgeting, Tertiary Education and Management 5,1999
[67]Frank, AS, Assumptions Underlying Performance-Based Budgeting, Tertiary Education and Management 5,1999.
[68]Jack Diamond, From Program to Performance Budgeting:The Challenge for Emerging Market Economics, IMF Working Paper,2003
[69]Kopczynski, Mary, and Michael Lombardo, Comparative Performance Measurement: Insights and Lessons Learned from a Consortium Effort, Public Administration Review 59(2),1999
[70]Kelman, S, Procurement and Public Management: The Fear of Discretion and the Quality of Public Performance, Washington, D.C:AEI Press,1990
[71]Miller, GJ, Productivity and the Budget Process, In.Holzer, Public Productivity Handbook, New York:Dekker,1992
[72]Melkers, Julia E., and Katherine G Willoughby., The State of the States:Performance-Based Budgeting Requirements in 47 out of 50, Public Administration Review 58(1),1998
[73]Melkers, J.E., and Katherine G. Performance-Budgeting Systems:Willoughby. Distinction Budgeters Views of Branches, State Public Administration Review 61(1),2001
[74]McNab, Robert, M., and Francois Melese., Implementing the GPRA Examining the Prospects for Performance Budgeting in the Federal Government, Public Budgeting & Finance 23(2),2003
[75]Piotrowski, Suzanne, J.and Rosenbloom, D.H., Nonmission-Based Values inResults-Oriented Public Manent: The Case of Freedom of Informtion, PublicAdministration Review 62(6),2002
[76]Radin, Beryl A., The Government Performance and Results Act and the Tradition ofFederal Management Reform: Square Pegs in Round Holes, Journal of PublicAdministration Research and Theory 10(1),2000
[77]Stiefel, Leanna, Ross Rubenstein, and Amy Ellen Schwartz, Using AdjustedPerformance Measwes for Evaluating Resowce Use, Public Budgeting & Finance 19(3),1999
[78]Teresa Curristine, Zsuzsanna Lonti and Isabelle Joumard, Improving Public Sector Efciency: Challenges and Opportunities, OECD Journal on Budgeting, V7-No.1,2007
[79]Williams, Clif, and Ward Melhuish., Is ABCM Destined for Success or Failure in the Federal Government, Public Budgeting&Finance 19(2),1999