Skip to main content

Designing Fiscal Institutions: The Political Economy of PFM Reforms

  • Chapter
The International Handbook of Public Financial Management

Abstract

The term “political economy” has become ubiquitous in policy debates on public financial management (PFM) systems and their reform. Yet its definition or what exactly people mean when they use the term often remains unclear. There are many ways in which political economy has been theorized over time (Caporaso and Levine 1992). Some of these are particularly relevant for the purposes of this chapter and, more generally, for discussions around budgeting and the design of institutions devoted to the management of public finances. Broadly, we think of a political economy approach as a particular way of analyzing and interpreting economic phenomena that emphasizes the importance of political factors and vice versa. Its focus is on the different actors involved, their potentially conflicting interests and incentives, and the institutions that regulate their behavior, as well as the incentives that such institutions, in turn, may engender. More narrowly, an approach that is sometimes referred to as “positive political economy” or “political economics” has a formal and quantitative focus. The latter entails the application of methods and approaches from the discipline of economics, building on the tools of rational choice and game theory, to study the interrelationship between politics and economics (Alt and Chrystal 1983).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Alesina, A., and R. Perotti. 1996. “Fiscal Discipline and the Budget Process,” American Economic Review 86(2): 401–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, R. 2009. “The Challenge of Reforming Budgetary Institutions in Developing Countries,” IMF Working Paper 09/96. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alt, J. E., and K. A. Chrystal. 1983. Political Economics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alt, J., D. D. Lassen and J. Wehner. 2012. “Moral Hazard in an Economic Union: Politics, Economics, and Fiscal Gimmickry in Europe,” Weatherhead Center for International Affairs Working Paper. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, M. 2013. The Limits of Institutional Reform in Development: Changing Rules for Realistic Solutions. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, M. 2010a. “Good Government Means Different Things in Different Countries,” Governance 23(1): 7–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, M. 2010b. “How Far Have Public Financial Management Reforms Come in Africa?,” HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series RWP10–018. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Kennedy School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blöndal, J. R. 2001. “Budgeting in Sweden,” OECD Journal on Budgeting 1(1): 27–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., and J. D. Straussman. 1982. “Shrinking Budgets and the Shrinkage of Budget Theory,” Public Administration Review 42(6): 509–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, J. C., and M. W. Crain. 2001. “Legislative Organization and Government Spending: Cross-Country Evidence,” Journal of Public Economics 82(3): 309–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinkerhoff, D. W., and A. A. Goldsmith. 2005. “Institutional Dualism and International Development: A Revisionist Interpretation of Good Governance,” Administration and Society 37(2): 199–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campos, E., and S. Pradhan. 1996. “Budgetary Institutions and Expenditure Outcomes: Binding Governments to Fiscal Performance,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 1646. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caporaso, J. A., and D. P. Levine. 1992. Theories of Political Economy. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Congleton, R. D., and B. Swedenborg (eds) 2006. Democratic Constitutional Design and Public Policy: Analysis and Evidence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, O. A., M. A. H. Dempster and A. Wildavsky. 1966. “A Theory of the Budgetary Process,” American Political Science Review 60(3): 529–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Renzio, P., M. Andrews and Z. Mills. 2011. “Does Donor Support to Public Financial Management Reforms in Developing Countries Work? An Analytical Study of Quantitative Cross-country Evidence,” ODI Working Paper 329. London: Overseas Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J. 2012a. Guidance Note on Sequencing PFM Reforms. Available on the Internet: http//www.pefa.org.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J. 2012b. Guidance Note on Sequencing PFM Reforms: Background Paper 1. Available on the Internet: http//www.pefa.org.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eslava, M. 2011. “The Political Economy of Fiscal Deficits: A Survey,” Journal of Economic Surveys 25(4): 645–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eurostat. 2004. “Report on the Revision of the Greek Government Deficit and Debt Figures,” November 22. Luxembourg: Eurostat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, P. 2004. “Development as Institutional Change: The Pitfalls of Monocropping and the Potentials of Deliberation,” Studies in Comparative International Development 38(4): 30–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallerberg, M., R. Strauch and J. von Hagen. 2009. Fiscal Governance in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hallerberg, M., and S. Yläoutinen. 2010. “Political Power, Fiscal Institutions and Budgetary Outcomes in Central and Eastern Europe,” Journal of Public Policy 30(1): 45–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heclo, H., and A. Wildavsky. 1974. The Private Government of Public Money. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heller, W. B. 1997. “Bicameralism and Budget Deficits: The Effect of Parliamentary Structure on Government Spending,” Legislative Studies Quarterly 22(4): 485–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IMF. 2009. “Republic of Latvia: Stand-by Arrangement – Aide-Mémoire,” Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Key, V. O. 1940. “The Lack of a Budgetary Theory,” American Political Science Review 34(6): 1137–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Killick, T. 2005. “The Politics of Ghana’s Budgetary System,” CDD/ODI Policy Brief 2. London: Overseas Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koen, V., and P. Van den Noord. 2005. “Fiscal Gimmickry in Europe: One-Off Measures and Creative Accounting,” OECD Economics Department Working Paper No. 417. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kraan, D.-J., J. Wehner, J. Sheppard, V. Kostyleva and B. Duzler. 2009. “Budgeting in Latvia,” OECD Journal on Budgeting 9(3): 185–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lassen, D. D. 2010. Fiscal Consolidations in Advanced Industrialized Democracies: Economics, Politics, and Governance. Stockholm: Finanspolitiska rådet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning, N. 2001. “The Legacy of the New Public Management in Developing Countries,” International Review of Administrative Sciences 67(2): 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milesi-Ferretti, G. M. 2003. “Good, Bad or Ugly? On the Effects of Fiscal Rules with Creative Accounting,” Journal of Public Economics 88 (1–2): 377–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molander, P. 2001. “Budgeting Procedures and Democratic Ideals: An Evaluation of Swedish Reforms,” Journal of Public Policy 21(1): 23–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musgrave, R. A. 1959. The Theory of Public Finance: A Study in Public Economy. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niskanen, W. A. 1971. Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Chicago: Aldine Atherton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parry, R. 2003. “The Influence of Heclo and Wildavsky’s The Private Government of Public Money,” Public Policy and Administration 18(4): 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson, T., and G. E. Tabellini. 2000. Political Economics: Explaining Economic Policy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Persson, T., and G. E. Tabellini. 2003. The Economic Effects of Constitutions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poterba, J. M., and J. von Hagen (eds) 1999. Fiscal Institutions and Fiscal Performance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rakner, L., L. Mukubvu, N. Ngwira, K. Smiddy and A. Schneider. 2004. The Budget as Theatre: The Formal and Informal Institutional Makings of the Budget Process in Malawi. Bergen: Christen Michelsen Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, I. 1989. “Aaron Wildavsky and the Demise of Incrementalism,” Public Administration Review 49(1): 78–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schick, A. 1966. “The Road to PPB: The Stages of Budget Reform,” Public Administration Review 26(4): 243–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schick, A. 1988. “An Inquiry into the Possibility of a Budgetary Theory,” in I. Rubin (ed.) New Directions in Budget Theory, pp. 59–69. New York: State University of New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schick, A. 1998. “Why Most Developing Countries Should Not Try New Zealand’s Reforms,” World Bank Research Observer 13(1): 123–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stasavage, D., and D. Moyo. 2000. “Are Cash Budgets a Cure for Excess Fiscal Deficits (and at What Cost)?,” World Development 28(12): 2105–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Hagen, J. 1992. “Budgeting Procedures and Fiscal Performance in the European Communities,” European Economy – Economic Papers 96, Brussels: Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, Commission of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Hagen, J., and I. J. Harden. 1995. “Budget Processes and Commitment to Fiscal Discipline,” European Economic Review 39(3): 771–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Hagen, J., and G. B. Wolff. 2006. “What Do Deficits Tell Us about Debt? Empirical Evidence on Creative Accounting with Fiscal Rules in the EU,” Journal of Banking and Finance 30(12): 3259–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wehner, J. 2007. “Budget Reform and Legislative Control in Sweden,” Journal of European Public Policy 14(2): 313–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wehner, J. 2010. Legislatures and the Budget Process: The Myth of Fiscal Control. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weingast, B. R., K. A. Shepsle, and C. Johnsen. 1981. “The Political Economy of Benefits and Costs: A Neoclassical Approach to Distributive Politics,” Journal of Political Economy 89(4): 642–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky, A. 1961. “Political Implications of Budgetary Reform,” Public Administration Review 21(4): 183–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky, A. B. 1964. The Politics of the Budgetary Process. Boston: Little Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky, A. B. 1975. Budgeting: A Comparative Theory of Budgetary Processes. Boston: Little Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. 1998. Public Expenditure Management Handbook. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Richard Allen Richard Hemming Barry H. Potter

Copyright information

© 2013 Joachim Wehner and Paolo de Renzio

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wehner, J., de Renzio, P. (2013). Designing Fiscal Institutions: The Political Economy of PFM Reforms. In: Allen, R., Hemming, R., Potter, B.H. (eds) The International Handbook of Public Financial Management. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137315304_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics