Crashing through with Accrual-Output Price Budgeting in Australia
- 1 March 2004
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in The American Review of Public Administration
- Vol. 34 (1), 94-111
- https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074003253315
Abstract
In 1999 Australia embarked on an accrual budgetary methodology in conjunction with an ambitious outcomesoutputs framework. The changes were entirely driven by central budgetary agencies who wanted to see the total costs (or prices) of outputs reflected in budgetary documentation and evidence of value for money in declared results. The government also decided to implement the changes within 1 year, and by adopting a crash-through mentality the central actors persevered and successfully achieved their main objective. Many problems, dilemmas, and inconsistencies were encountered along the way, not the least of which raised questions about the very nature of the annual budget. This article examines the trajectory of these reforms and asks how successfully they were implemented and accepted. It also raises questions about many of the decisions made in the process of change and whether the quality of budgetary information has improved the cabinet decision-making process. The article argues that accrual budgeting was implemented in Australia with many compromises and adaptations, but that the exercise should be understood primarily as part of a broader process of public sector reform.Keywords
This publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Implications of GASB Statement No. 34 for Public BudgetingPublic Budgeting & Finance, 2001
- Devising Administrative Reform That Works: The Example of the Reinvention Lab ProgramPublic Administration Review, 1999
- Why Governments Should Produce Balance SheetsAustralian Journal of Public Administration, 1996
- Government Accrual Reports: Are They Better Than Cash?Australian Journal of Public Administration, 1996
- Public Sector Accounting and the Challenge of ManagerialismPublished by Springer Nature ,1990