Search results

This paper aims to respond to the recent calls to discover the research developments in the field of public budgeting. Particularly, it explores whether and how research dialogue unfolds within the public budgeting field over time and how to stimulate it further, by investigating the case of a specific journal oriented to budgeting topics.

Applying a case study strategy, this paper reviews previous studies on public budgeting published in one specific journal, the Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting and Financial Management (JPBAFM), from its “online inception” in 1994 to 2020. Borrowing ideas from dialogue literature, the authors analyse 108 selected papers according to a multi-dimensional framework for exploring research dialogues taking into account the year of publication, authorship (and affiliation), research setting, method and theoretical approach, and, above all, research topics on budgeting.

The findings illustrate that whilst public budgeting research has been fluctuating over time in the JPBAFM, there is a growing interest in the topic over the last several years (2015–2020). Yet, the journal illustrates a limited dialogic development of the field of public budgeting, where produced knowledge has been significantly North America-oriented, normative and quantitative-dominated. Until recently, only a limited role has been given to dialogue formation between researchers and practitioners, but the current debate is increasingly being enriched by new perspectives and a wider range of experiences. Finally, public budgeting has been addressed from multiple perspectives over time, with a significant impact determined by performance and participatory budgeting. Although multiple topics are receiving growing attention, it is still under-developed in the inter-dialogue formation between topics and theories, despite the more recently growing use of different theoretical approaches and empirical and analytical rigour.

The research is limited to one journal as a case study and does not claim to provide an overall reflection of public budgeting research and related empirical generalisations. Instead, the authors strive for a theoretical generalisation of multi-dimensional dialogue importance in the field.

The value of the research lies in a comprehensive analysis of research dialogue formation within public sector budgeting over time in an international journal that has actively engaged with public sector issues and, specifically, with budgeting. By so doing, this paper adds a critical stand on the value of dialogue in fostering inter-contextual and inter-disciplinary research in the field of public budgeting.

To address the growing pressure to foster effectiveness, sustainability and quality of life, local governments have focused on developing policies and initiatives designed to make their cities smarter. Despite the growing attention paid to this issue, an important but under-investigated issue is represented by the smart city governance. In this regard, in light of the claimed need for collaboration, the purpose of this paper is to investigate why and how different institutional works carried out by multiple actors may explain the way in which collaborative governance can be constructed in the context of a smart city.

A rich in-depth case study has been carried out exploring the experience of a smart city in the north of Italy. The study explores the institutional works done by multiple actors (Lawrence et al., 2013) and their influence on the governance of the smart city.

Collaboration is perceived to be instrumental in making a city smart, during the design and implementation phase, while generating new challenges that must be overcome by an integration of the political, technical and, especially, cultural work of the collective actors involved.

Despite governance is recognized as a crucial factor for realizing a smartness-orientation, it is scarcely investigated. The main value of the current research is thus its contribution to overcome this gap providing new empirical evidence on the role of multiple actors in the smart city context.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the under-investigated role played by different key organizational actors engaged in the practice of performance-based budgeting (PBB) (e.g. Ministry of Finance, National Audit Office, Sectoral Agencies) to explore how they influence the practice of PBB, contributing to lead the change or create resistance toward it.

The empirical evidence has been collected through a multiple case study based on semi-structured interviews and document analysis in Sweden and Finland, which have long traditions with PBB, and has been interpreted through the lens of institutional and organizational change theory.

The results show that, despite the lengthy experiences with PBB, the lack of sound dynamics across key actors makes the budgetary use of performance information limited and partial, placing the reform in a “gray area” between the complete implementation of the practice and the total resistance toward it.

The knowledge obtained from the exploratory analysis has relevant implications for understanding differences and similarities across key organizational actors and underlining their crucial role in making a change feasible. Indeed, PBB may represent a radical change even in presence of embedded performance management systems.

Participatory budgeting (PB) is considered a suitable tool for supporting and promoting citizen engagement in government work. Previous studies of PB have deeply investigated its design and effects, but paid little attention to the underlying logics of adopting and implementing PB. The purpose of this paper is to, accordingly, investigate the development over time of the institutional logics of PB and attempt to explain their effect on PB.

Using a longitudinal multiple case study design, this research analyzes the evolution of institutional logics over time and across five municipalities in Italy. The analysis integrates documents with interviews conducted at two times to investigate the evolution of PB logics.

The development of PB is characterized by the spread of two emerging logics–i.e. managerial and community-building logics–that replace or coexist with the traditional political logic. Indeed, these different logics can coexist within governments, with different degrees of conflict or coexistence, resulting in what can be considered a hybrid logic.

Although the number of examined cases is limited, this research elaborates an original conceptual approach and provides new insights that could help in better designing and implementing PB.

This research builds knowledge of PB by shedding light on its different logics, linking them to diverse specific models of PB and exploring their changes over time.

The study aims to assess the COVID-19 event in three European countries (Germany, Italy and the UK) by investigating the quality of their performance management of it.

Pragmatic constructivism (PC) is employed as a lens through which the performance management of each country can be examined and compared over a period encompassing the first wave of COVID-19.

Official statistics show that one of the countries has a significantly lower death rate. It developed and operated a more detailed and precise system of performance management. From the perspective of PC, this system supported efforts to build a functioning reality construction integrating facts, possibilities, values and communication.

The evaluation of different national approaches to the performance management of the COVID-19 reality is novel to the literature on management accounting. PC is used as a diagnostic tool to pinpoint strengths and weaknesses of the performance management of public sector activities in different countries.

This paper introduces the second part of a AAAJ special issue on accounting, accountability and management during the COVID-19 emergency. The authors analyse the themes that emerge from the second part of the special issue, which allows us to identify the diverse accounting and accountability practices across different geographical and organisational contexts. The authors also provide an overall picture of the contributions of the special issue, with insights into avenues of future research.

Building on the first part of the AAAJ special issue, the paper draws together and identifies additional emerging themes related to research into the COVID-19 pandemic and how it impacts accounting, accountability and management practices. The authors reflect on the contributions of the special issue to the interdisciplinary accounting research project.

The authors identify two macro-themes and outline their contributions to the accounting literature. The first deals with the changes and dangers of accounting and accountability practices during the pandemic. The second considers accountability practices in a broader sense, including reporting, disclosure and rhetorical practices in the management of COVID-19.

The paper shows the pervasive role of accounting and accountability in the unprecedented and indiscriminate health crisis of COVID-19. It highlights the important role of special issues in producing timely research that responds to unfolding events.

This paper contributes to current debates on the roles of accounting and accountability during COVID-19 by drawing together the themes of the special issue and identifying future interdisciplinary accounting research on the pandemic's aftermath.