Exportação concluída — 

The Governance of Public Budgeting: a Proposal for Comparative Analyses - the Cases of São Paulo and London

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Peres,Ursula Dias
Publication Date: 2022
Format: Article
Language: eng
Source: Brazilian Political Science Review
Download full: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-38212022000200204
Summary: This paper aims at understanding the governance of public budgeting in large metropolises with the use of comparative analysis. The analysis is focused on budgetary governance in London and São Paulo and uses qualitative and quantitative data from 2008 to 2019 to understand whether analytical categories such as incrementalism of expenditures, complexity of budgetary rules, bureaucratic hierarchy, bargaining, and muddling through are useful to compare two metropolises, especially to determine the discretionary power of mayors in making budget allocation decisions. The analytical categories are derived from the studies of theorists of economics and political sociology, notably Wildavsky (1975, 1969), Wildavsky and Caiden (2004), Schick (2009, 1976), Caiden (2010) Lascoumes and Le Galès (2005), Baumgartner and Jones (2005), and Fuchs (2012, 2010). The main argument of the paper is that, despite the administrative and political differences between London and São Paulo, similar dimensions can explain decisions about budget allocation and the political discretionary power of mayors. The study shows that mayors have little discretionary power, particularly in contexts of fiscal austerity; it also highlights the importance of property tax as a means to protect such power.
id ABCP-1_90b7f5128ae974f3c2d9fee210ccb31d
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1981-38212022000200204
network_acronym_str ABCP-1
network_name_str Brazilian Political Science Review
repository_id_str
spelling The Governance of Public Budgeting: a Proposal for Comparative Analyses - the Cases of São Paulo and LondonPublic budgetinggovernanceLondonSão Paulofiscal austerityThis paper aims at understanding the governance of public budgeting in large metropolises with the use of comparative analysis. The analysis is focused on budgetary governance in London and São Paulo and uses qualitative and quantitative data from 2008 to 2019 to understand whether analytical categories such as incrementalism of expenditures, complexity of budgetary rules, bureaucratic hierarchy, bargaining, and muddling through are useful to compare two metropolises, especially to determine the discretionary power of mayors in making budget allocation decisions. The analytical categories are derived from the studies of theorists of economics and political sociology, notably Wildavsky (1975, 1969), Wildavsky and Caiden (2004), Schick (2009, 1976), Caiden (2010) Lascoumes and Le Galès (2005), Baumgartner and Jones (2005), and Fuchs (2012, 2010). The main argument of the paper is that, despite the administrative and political differences between London and São Paulo, similar dimensions can explain decisions about budget allocation and the political discretionary power of mayors. The study shows that mayors have little discretionary power, particularly in contexts of fiscal austerity; it also highlights the importance of property tax as a means to protect such power.Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política2022-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-38212022000200204Brazilian Political Science Review v.16 n.2 2022reponame:Brazilian Political Science Reviewinstname:Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política (ABCP)instacron:ABCP10.1590/1981-3821202200020003info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPeres,Ursula Diaseng2022-06-07T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1981-38212022000200204Revistahttps://brazilianpoliticalsciencereview.org/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpbpsr@brazilianpoliticalsciencareview.org||bpsr@bpsr.org.br1981-38211981-3821opendoar:2022-06-07T00:00Brazilian Political Science Review - Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política (ABCP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The Governance of Public Budgeting: a Proposal for Comparative Analyses - the Cases of São Paulo and London
title The Governance of Public Budgeting: a Proposal for Comparative Analyses - the Cases of São Paulo and London
spellingShingle The Governance of Public Budgeting: a Proposal for Comparative Analyses - the Cases of São Paulo and London
Peres,Ursula Dias
Public budgeting
governance
London
São Paulo
fiscal austerity
title_short The Governance of Public Budgeting: a Proposal for Comparative Analyses - the Cases of São Paulo and London
title_full The Governance of Public Budgeting: a Proposal for Comparative Analyses - the Cases of São Paulo and London
title_fullStr The Governance of Public Budgeting: a Proposal for Comparative Analyses - the Cases of São Paulo and London
title_full_unstemmed The Governance of Public Budgeting: a Proposal for Comparative Analyses - the Cases of São Paulo and London
title_sort The Governance of Public Budgeting: a Proposal for Comparative Analyses - the Cases of São Paulo and London
author Peres,Ursula Dias
author_facet Peres,Ursula Dias
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Peres,Ursula Dias
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Public budgeting
governance
London
São Paulo
fiscal austerity
topic Public budgeting
governance
London
São Paulo
fiscal austerity
description This paper aims at understanding the governance of public budgeting in large metropolises with the use of comparative analysis. The analysis is focused on budgetary governance in London and São Paulo and uses qualitative and quantitative data from 2008 to 2019 to understand whether analytical categories such as incrementalism of expenditures, complexity of budgetary rules, bureaucratic hierarchy, bargaining, and muddling through are useful to compare two metropolises, especially to determine the discretionary power of mayors in making budget allocation decisions. The analytical categories are derived from the studies of theorists of economics and political sociology, notably Wildavsky (1975, 1969), Wildavsky and Caiden (2004), Schick (2009, 1976), Caiden (2010) Lascoumes and Le Galès (2005), Baumgartner and Jones (2005), and Fuchs (2012, 2010). The main argument of the paper is that, despite the administrative and political differences between London and São Paulo, similar dimensions can explain decisions about budget allocation and the political discretionary power of mayors. The study shows that mayors have little discretionary power, particularly in contexts of fiscal austerity; it also highlights the importance of property tax as a means to protect such power.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-38212022000200204
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-38212022000200204
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1981-3821202200020003
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Political Science Review v.16 n.2 2022
reponame:Brazilian Political Science Review
instname:Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política (ABCP)
instacron:ABCP
instname_str Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política (ABCP)
instacron_str ABCP
institution ABCP
reponame_str Brazilian Political Science Review
collection Brazilian Political Science Review
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Political Science Review - Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política (ABCP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv bpsr@brazilianpoliticalsciencareview.org||bpsr@bpsr.org.br
_version_ 1754302908417966080