25

Ушбу мақолада натижага йўналтирилган бюджетлаштириш концепциясининг самарадорлик ва натижадорлигининг миқдорий ҳамда сифат кўрсаткичларини аниқлаш бўйича ўрганишлар олиб борилган. Бу борадаги хорижлик иқтисодчиларнинг илмий қарашлари таҳлил қилинган. Шунингдек, натижага йўналтирилган бюджетлаштиришни амалга оширишни таҳлил қилиш учун асос бўладиган омиллар аниқланган

  • Read count 25
  • Date of publication 05-07-2024
  • Main LanguageO'zbek
  • Pages703-715
Ўзбек

Ушбу мақолада натижага йўналтирилган бюджетлаштириш концепциясининг самарадорлик ва натижадорлигининг миқдорий ҳамда сифат кўрсаткичларини аниқлаш бўйича ўрганишлар олиб борилган. Бу борадаги хорижлик иқтисодчиларнинг илмий қарашлари таҳлил қилинган. Шунингдек, натижага йўналтирилган бюджетлаштиришни амалга оширишни таҳлил қилиш учун асос бўладиган омиллар аниқланган

Русский

В данной статье были проведены исследования по определению количественных и качественных показателей эффективности и результативности концепции бюджетирования, ориентированного на результат. Проанализированы научные взгляды зарубежных экономистов по этому поводу. Также выявлены факторы, которые служат основой для анализа реализации бюджетирования, ориентированного на результат

English

This article conducted research to determine quantitative and qualitative indicators of the efficiency and effectiveness of the results-based budgeting concept. The scientific views of foreign economists on this matter are analyzed. Factors that serve as the basis for analyzing the implementation of results-based budgeting are also identified.

№ Author name position Name of organisation
1 Primova N.I. dotsent v.b. Toshkent davlat iqtisodiyot universiteti moliya kafedrasi
№ Name of reference
1 https://lex.uz/docs/4966572
2 https://lex.uz/docs/4966572
3 Moscher Frederik C. American Public Administration. Past, Present, Future. Seventh Printing. Copyright 1975 by The The Maksvell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs and the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration. 1994. R. 291).
4 Diamond J. Performance Budgeting: Managing the Reform Process. IMF Working Paper, International Monetary Fund. 2003. Р. 3–28.
5 Kelly Janet M. Performance Budgeting for State and Local Government / by Janet M. Kelly and William C. Rivenbark. – 2nd ed. 2011. P. 23.
6 Shan Anwar and Shen Chunli. A Primer on Performance Budgeting. Budgeting and Budgetary Institutions, edited by Anwar Shan, Washington: World Bank. 2007. P. 137–178.
7 Примова Н. Ўзбекистонда натижага йўналтирилган бюджетлаштириш механизмини ривожлантириш. // “Yashil iqtisodiyot va taraqqiyot” илмий- электрон журнали. 2024 й. №4-сон.
8 Friedman M. A guide to developing and using performance measures in results-based budgeting. Baltimore, MD: The Finance Project. 1997. P. 1–34.
9 Hager G. and Hobson A. Performance-based Budgeting: Concepts and Examples. Research Report No. 302. Legislative Research Commission. 2001. P. 3– 69.
10 Young Richard D. Performance-Based Budget Systems. USC Institute for Public Service and Policy Research – Public Policy & Practice, 2003 (11). P. 12–24.
11 OECD. Issues in Output Measurement for «Government in Glance». Issues in Output Measurement for «Government in Glanc». OECD GOV Technical Paper 3. OECD project on Management in Government. GOV/PGC. 2006. 10/ANN2. Paris.
12 Performance-based Budgeting: Concepts and Examples. Research Report No. 302. Prepared by G. Hager and A. Hobson. Legislative Research Commission, 2001. P. 3–69.
13 Segal A. and Summers A. Citizens’ Budget Reports: Improving Performance and Accoun-tability in Government. Reason Public Policy Institute, Policy Study No. 292. 2002. P. 1–48.
14 Robinson M. and Brumby J. Does Performance Budgeting Work? An Analytical Review of the Empirical Literature. IMF Working Paper, International Monetary Fund. 2005. Р. 3–75.
15 Grizzle G.A. Linking Performance to Funding Decisions: What Is the Budgeter’s Roles? Public Productivity Review, Vol.10 (3). 1987. P. 33–44;
16 Schick A. Planning-Programming-Budgeting-System: A Symposium. Public Administration Review, 26. 1966. P. 243–258).
17 Burkhead J. Government Budgeting. New York, NY: John Willey & Sons. 1956.
18 Berman E. and Wang XiaoHu. Performance Measurement in U.S. Countries: Capacity of Reform. Public Administration Review, Vol. 65 (5). 2000. P. 409–420;
19 Cope G.H. Local Government Budgeting and Productivity: Friends or Foes? Public Productivity Review, Vol. 10 (3). 1987. Р. 45–57.
20 Hood C. The «New Public Management» in the 1980s: Variations on a theme. Accounting Organization and Society, Vol. 20(2–3). 1995. P. 93–109.
21 Poister T.H. and Streib G. Performance Measurement in Municipal Government: Assessing the State of the Practice. Public Administration Review, Vol. 59 (4). 1999. P. 325–335.
22 Lee R.D. Jr. A Quarter Century of State Budgeting Practices. Public Administration Review, 57(2). 1997. P. 133–140.
23 Andrews M. and Hill H. The Impact of Traditional Budgeting Systems on the Effectiveness of Performance-based Budgeting: A Different Viewpoint on Recent Findings. International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 26. No. 2. 2003. P. 35– 155.
24 Gilmour J.B. and Lewis D. Does Performance Budgeting Work? An Examination of the Office of Management and Budget’s PART Scores. Public Administration Review, 66 (5). 2006. P. 742–752.
25 Shah A. Balance, Accountability, and Responsiveness: Lessons about Decentralization. The World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series, Paper 2021, World Bank, Washington, DC. 1998. P. 1–43).
Waiting