Search results

This article highlights key aspects of capital management, including capital planning, capital budgeting, capital financing, decision making and capital spending outcomes. We provide a background discussion of public sector capital management, followed by a summary of the articles that comprise this symposium. Combined, these articles illustrate the complexity of and challenges to capital management at the state and local government levels. We discuss common themes that emerge from reading these articles as a collective symposium, including: (1) modest progress in applying and empirically testing theoretical frameworks; (2) the variety of actors and institutions; and (3) the deteriorating condition and poor performance of public infrastructure. We use the articles to illustrate gaps in the research and offer suggestions for future research on capital management theory and practice.

This study describes the Illinois State capital budget process and explains why traditional capital planning has not been adopted in Illinois. The state uses non-accounting techniques and multi-attribute judgment criteria, including political and social values, to make decisions. The case suggests that regardless of their sophistication, accounting methods are, relatively, not useful in ranking capital projects across functions. The methods compare "pples" and "oranges." A comparison of capital projects across functions may be impossible with any set of methods. Intelligent sub-optimization within given functions may be the best academics and practitioners can hope for in rationalizing project choice and maintenance, particularly in large cities or state governments. Public capital-budgeting educators might shift their focus in training prospective public budgeters, from accounting methods to critical thinking, through multi-attribute analysis methods.

In the United States, the 1993 Government Performance and Result Act (GPRA) has increased public demand for governments not only to produce and deliver public goods and services, but also to demonstrate program effectiveness, which is the ultimate goal of a public program's existence, mission, and spending. This public management approach parallels the results-oriented management, which aims to strengthen organizational effectiveness and emphasize the need to integrate all major activities and functions, an activity that will direct them toward advancing organization-wide strategic goals or fundamental policy agendas (Kettl, 1997). Managers use program outputs and outcomes as implementation benchmarks to identify implementation means or directions (Kettl, 1997). By reporting performance measurement results to the public and policy makers, public managers are held accountable for the tax-dollars spent to produce and deliver public services in the most efficient and effective way (Aristigueta, 2007). Performance measurement results, especially those related to outcome achievement, are partially useful in budget allocation from the perspective that the tax-dollars spent are tied to desirable outcomes rather than to program input costs that may or may not correspond with public desires (DuPont-Morales & Harris, 1994).

During the last decade, globalization and democratization have been the major forces that helped transform the structures, functions and processes of Asian public sectors. These transformation efforts of Asian countries vary considerably depending on local context, and have met with different degrees of success. Some countries experienced smooth transformations. For others, the reform process has been more volatile. These issues were explored at a conference 7–9 July 2008 in Bangkok, Thailand, hosted by the Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University, and co-sponsored by the International Public Management Network, the Asia-Pacific Governance Institute, and Thailand Democracy Watch. This book presents some of the works contributed by participating scholars and practitioners at the conference. The contents fall into three categories: corruption and anti-corruption initiatives, public financial management (PFM) and public management reforms with emphasis on performance and results.