Control Patterns in State Budget Execution
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6364443 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Allen Schick (0000-0002-9230-6503, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1964 |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 97-97 |
| Publication date | 1964-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Public Administration Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0033-3352 • E-ISSN: 1540-6210 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.2307/973452 |
| OpenAlex | W2318421737 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
A SIGNIFICANT development in state budgetary practices during past thirty years has been proliferation of centralized controls over expenditures after budget has been approved by legislature.' A. E. Buck's comprehensive study, Public Budgeting, published in 1929, contained only six pages on controls utilized in execution phase of budget.2 Yet, in 1959 Professor James W. Martin claimed that the most important area of decision-making is area of budget execution, not area of presentation of estimates or even area of legislative action.3 According to one state's estimate, execution consumes more than half working time of its budget staff.4 Other estimates obtained in conversations with budget officials attribute as much as 75 per cent of normal budget examiner's time to execution
Control (management · Programming language · State (computer science · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Fiscal Policies and Political Economy · Local Government Finance and Decentralization · Public Policy and Administration Research
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,08 |
| Citation span | 1977 - 2020 (44) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 4 |