Results-oriented Budget Practice in oecd countries odi working Papers 209

Chapter 9: Future directions 
The first chapter of this paper reviewed the state of play in key OECD countries. The major 
findings were that most countries have taken major steps towards results oriented budgeting over 
the last decade but the extent to which these had been achieved has been dependent upon a number 
of factors, including constitutional and governance arrangements in each country and the political 
will to achieve this goal. Results oriented budgeting is unfinished business in all states attempting 
such reforms. A major steer towards results oriented government has been provided by the OECD 
through its Public Management Committee, which has played a role in disseminating ‘good 
practice’ and is increasingly setting an international agenda for reform. To this end, its meeting 
2002 was “designed to give officials an opportunity to talk about the difficult choices policymakers 
must make in order to prepare a credible budget” (World Bank, 2002). 
A key agenda item at this meeting was the question of the growth of agencies in OECD member 
states and the question of whether governments have the capacity to oversee the actions of these 
agencies. A paper given by Schick (2002b) raises issues including whether agencies should be 
located within departments or as free-standing entities, and the extent to which agencies are 
accountable to central organs such as ministries of finance and Cabinets.
The question of extending time horizons was discussed. The discussion paper states 
“Strategies to encourage managers to take a longer view and aim for sustainable efficiency 
include measures to introduce: (i) greater flexibility; (ii) wider timeframes through pluri-annual 
appropriations and budgets; (iii) de-coupling and contractual relationships; and (iv) more 
inclusive accounting techniques, as employed particularly in accrual-base budgeting” (PUMA, 
2002c).
Accruals accounting has been adopted by member states and the tabled paper concluded that: 
“accruals is not a ‘magic bullet’ for improving the performance of the public sector. It is 
simply a tool for getting better information about the true cost of government. It needs to be 
used effectively and in tandem with a number of other management reforms in order to 
achieve the desired improvement in decision-making in government” (PUMA, 2002b).
Finally, it is worth returning to the point, made by the Auditor General of Canada, that these 
reforms need to be fully evaluated. The literature on results oriented budgeting is dominated by 
accounts prepared by state officials describing how budgeting works in their country. Whilst 
Canada and New Zealand lead the world in commissioning independent evaluations of their 
reforms, there remains a paucity of academic inquiry in this area, particularly research that includes 
audit and evaluation as key issues. The UK Parliament’s Public Administration Select Committee 
is currently conducting an inquiry into public service targets and tables. It will be of interest to see 
what evidence it takes from academics, what the committee reports and how their recommendations 
feed into the policy process. 

---

56