"One, no-one, one hundred thousand" spending reviews

Author/s Daniela Monacelli, Aline Pennisi
Publishing Year 2015 Issue 2015/1 Language Italian
Pages 40 P. 69-108 File size 605 KB
DOI 10.3280/EP2015-001004
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Internationally, spending reviews are increasingly considered to be the most appropriate tool to facilitate the reallocation and the reduction of public expenditure because they offer a path to improve the "rationality" of decisionmaking aimed at the achievement of the final goals of public intervention. However, the actual experiences are very diverse, difficult to encode, and change their features over time even in the same country, in response to the external environment. This paper presents the contribution expected in recent years from spending reviews in connection with the financial and economic crisis. It also describes the main features of a spending review, drawing considerations on the Italian case. In particular, it highlights the multiplicity of actions taken and the associated coordination problems, and it discusses the need to implement a tighter integration of the spending review in the budget process, signaling the difficulties encountered.

Keywords: Spending review, public expenditure control, budgeting

Jel codes: H11, H61, H83

  1. Anderson B. (2009). The changing role of parliament in the budget process. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 1/1: 1-11. DOI: 10.1787/budget-v9-art2-en
  2. Banca d’Italia (vari anni), Relazione Annuale, Roma.
  3. Blöndal J.R., Kristensen J.K., Ruffner M. (2002). Budgeting in Finland. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 2/2: 119-152. DOI: 10.1787/budget-v2-art12-en
  4. Bourgon J. (2009). Program Review: The Government of Canada’s Experience Eliminating the Deficit, 1994-1999 – A Canadian Case Study. The Centre for International Governance Innovation. Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
  5. Boyle R. (2011). Better use of public money. The contribution of spending reviews and performance budgeting. IPA Research paper, 5 ottobre.
  6. Brown G. (1998). Speech on the Comprehensive Spending Review to the House of Commons. Londra, 14 luglio.
  7. Commissione Europea (vari anni). Public Finance in the EMU. Bruxelles. DOI: 10.1787/(varicodici)
  8. De Ioanna P. (2013). A nostre spese. Crescere di più tagliando meglio. Lo Spending Review nell’Italia sprecona. Roma: Castelvecchi.
  9. De Ioanna P., Landi L. (2012). Politica e tecnica: un nodo cruciale per la democrazia. Econpubblica, Short Notes Series, 3 settembre.
  10. Ferry L., Eckersley P. (2011). Budgeting and Governing for Deficit Reduction in the UK Public Sector. Journal of Finance and Management in Public Services, 10/1. DOI: 10.1080/09540962.2012.656017
  11. Giarda P. (1997). Controllo della spesa pubblica e procedure di bilancio in Italia: alcuni recenti sviluppi, Politica economica, 13. 2, pp. 179-202.
  12. Giarda P., Parmentola N. (a cura di) (1990). Bilanci pubblici e crisi finanziaria. Bologna: il Mulino.
  13. Goretti C., Rizzuto L. (2013). Spending review in Italia. Uso e abuso di un termine. In: Di Virgilio A., Radaelli C.M. (a cura di), Politica in Italia. Bologna: il Mulino: 197-215.
  14. Hawkesworth I., Klepsvik K. (2013). Budgeting levers, strategic agility and the use of performance budgeting in 2011/12. OECD Journal of Budgeting, 13/1: 105-40. DOI: 10.1787/budget-13-5k3ttg15bs3
  15. Heller P. (2005), Back to the Basics – Fiscal Space: What It Is and How to Get It. Finance and Development, 42/2, June.
  16. James O. (2004). The UK Core Executive’s Use of Public Service As a Tool of Governance. Public Administration, 82 (2): 397-419. DOI: 10.1111/j.0033-3298.2004.00400.x
  17. James O., Nakamura A. (2013), Public service agreements as a tool of coordination in UK central government: the case of employment, COCOPS Work Package 5: The Governance of Social Cohesion: Innovative Coordination Practices in Public Management, http://www.cocops.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/UK_Employment
  18. _Public-Service-Agreements.pdf (consultazione al 31.12.2014). Kraan D.-J. (2007). Programme Budgeting in OECD countries. OECD Journal of Budgeting, 7/11: 1-41. DOI: 10.1787/budget-v7-art18-en
  19. Kraan D.-J. (2011). Recommendations to Denmark for strengthening the expenditure framework and the spending review procedures. Presentation to 32nd OECD Senior Budget Officer meeting, Lussemburgo, 7 giugno.
  20. Levine C.H., Rubin I. (eds.) (1980). Fiscal stress and public policy. Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications.
  21. Marcel M. (2014). Budgeting for fiscal space and government performance beyond the great recession. OECD Journal of Budgeting, 13/2: 9-47. DOI: 10.1787/budget-13-5jz2jw9t0pd3
  22. Ministère de l’Économie et des Finances (2012), Bilan de la RGPP et conditions de réussite d’une nouvelle politique de réforme de l’État. Paris.
  23. Monacelli D., Pennisi A. (2011). L’esperienza della spending review in Italia: Problemi aperti e sfide per il futuro. Politica economica, 27/2: 255-90. DOI: 10.1429/35200
  24. OECD (2011). “Typology and Implementation of Spending Reviews”, Presentation to the 7th OECD Senior Budget Officer Meeting, Parigi, 9-10 novembre.
  25. OECD (2013).Government at a Glance, Parigi. DOI: 10.1787/gov_glance-2013-en
  26. Padoa-Schioppa T. (2009). La veduta corta. Bologna: il Mulino.
  27. Pidd M. (2005). Perversity in public service performance measurement. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 54, 5/6: 482-93. DOI: 10.1108/17410400510604601
  28. Ragioneria Generale dello Stato (2009). Rapporto sulla spesa delle Amministrazioni centrali dello Stato. Roma
  29. Ragioneria Generale dello Stato (2012). Rapporto sulla spesa delle Amministrazioni centrali dello Stato. Roma.
  30. Ragioneria Generale dello Stato (2013). Il Bilancio in breve 2013. Roma.
  31. Robinson M. (2014). Spending Reviews. OECD Journal of Budgeting, 13/2: 1-42. DOI: 10.1787/budget-13-5jz14bz8p2hd
  32. Schick A. (2009). The changing role of the central budget office. In: OECD, Evolutions in Budgetary Practice, Paris: 167-184.
  33. Schick A. (2013). Lessons from the crisis. OECD Journal of Budgeting, 12/3: 1-29. DOI: 10.1787/budget-12-5k47tb29wn6h
  34. Schick A. (2014). The metamorphoses of performance budgeting. OECD Journal of Budgeting, 13/2. DOI: 10.1787/budget-13-5jz2jw9szgs8
  35. Steger G. (2010). ‘Austria’s budget reform; how to create consensus for a decisive change of fiscal rules’. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 10/1: 1-14,
  36. Steve S. (1978). Per una politica della spesa pubblica in Italia. Conclusioni del Convegno della Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica, Pavia 7-8 ottobre 1977. In: Steve S. (1997). Scritti vari. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  37. Talbot C. (2010). Performance in Government: The Evolving System of Performance and Evaluation Measurement, Monitoring, and Management in the United Kingdom. ECD Working Paper Series 24. Washington, DC: World Bank.
  38. Tarschys D. (1986). From Expansion to Restraint: Recent Developments in Budgeting. Public Budgeting and Finance, 6 (3); tradotto in italiano in: Giarda e Palmentarola (1990).
  39. United Kingdom (2010). Spending review 2010
  40. Vandierendonck C. (2014). Public Spending Reviews: design, conduct, implementation. European Economy, Economic Papers, 525, July. DOI: 10.2765/70397

  • LLE-Government in Italia: Situazione Attuale, Problemi E Prospettive (E-Government in Italy: Current Issues and Future Perspectives) Carlo Maria Arpaia, Pasquale Ferro, Walter Giuzio, in SSRN Electronic Journal /2016
    DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2759876

Daniela Monacelli, Aline Pennisi, Spending Review: una, nessuna, centomila in "ECONOMIA PUBBLICA " 1/2015, pp 69-108, DOI: 10.3280/EP2015-001004