IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/col/000123/003574.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The colombian budget process

Author

Listed:
  • Ulpiano Ayala Oramas
  • Roberto Perotti

Abstract

The rules that govern the budget process are important determinants of fiscal outcomes, with potentially important macroeconomic implications. This paper starts with a review of the theoretical underpinnings of the effects of budget processes and the main empirical evidence. After a brief institutional description of the Colombian budget process, an assessment and proposals for reform are made. The main issues analyzed here are the degree of centralization of the budget process, transparency, rules, and intertemporal links. Serious flaws have been detected: decentralization during the preparation of the budget, proliferation of budget documents, heterodox accounting standards and reporting for deficits and investment, insufficient coverage, biased forecasts and macro assumptions, unduly restrictive rules that promote creative accounting, or seemingly innocuous rules, and weak management of intertemporal links. It is recognized that better rules and institutions can be circumvented, but they can be important in realizing three conditions: allow the public a good understanding of fiscal policy and position, increase the incentives for fiscal discipline, and create an environment where a fiscally sound government can do its job more effectively, and a fiscally undisciplined government will be subject to a more informed scrutiny. These conditions can greatly enhance the scope for a more effective fiscal policy in Colombia.

Suggested Citation

  • Ulpiano Ayala Oramas & Roberto Perotti, 2000. "The colombian budget process," Working Papers Series. Documentos de Trabajo 3574, Fedesarrollo.
  • Handle: RePEc:col:000123:003574
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/11445/825
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alberto F. Alesina & Roberto Perotti, 1999. "Budget Deficits and Budget Institutions," NBER Chapters, in: Fiscal Institutions and Fiscal Performance, pages 13-36, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Alberto Alesina & Tamim Bayoumi, 1996. "The Costs and Benefits of Fiscal Rules: Evidence from U.S. States," NBER Working Papers 5614, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Alt, James E. & Lowry, Robert C., 1994. "Divided Government, Fiscal Institutions, and Budget Deficits: Evidence from the States," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(4), pages 811-828, December.
    4. James M. Poterba, 1996. "Do Budget Rules Work?," NBER Working Papers 5550, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Poterba, James M. & von Hagen, Jurgen (ed.), 1999. "Fiscal Institutions and Fiscal Performance," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226676234, December.
    6. James M. Poterba & Jürgen von Hagen, 1999. "Fiscal Institutions and Fiscal Performance," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number pote99-1, March.
    7. Robert P. Inman, 1996. "Do Balanced Budget Rules Work? U.S. Experience and Possible Lessons for the EMU," NBER Working Papers 5838, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Juan Carlos Echeverry & Leopoldo Fergusson & Pablo Querubin, 2004. "La Batalla Política Por El Presupuesto De La Nación: Inflexibilidades O Supervivencia Fiscal," Documentos CEDE 2944, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    2. Juan Carlos Echeverry & Jorge Alexander Bonilla & Andrés Moya, 2006. "Rigideces Institucionales y Flexibilidad Presupuestaria: Origen, Motivación y Efectos sobre el Presupuesto," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 9091, Inter-American Development Bank.
    3. Olivera, Mauricio & Pachón, Mónica & Perry, Guillermo, 2010. "The Political Economy of Fiscal Reform: The Case of Colombia, 1986-2006," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 1718, Inter-American Development Bank.
    4. Alejandro Hoyos & Hugo Nopo, 2010. "Evolution of Gender Gaps in Latin America at the Turn of the Twentieth Century: An Addendum to "New Century, Old Disparities"," Research Department Publications 4665, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    5. World Bank, 2005. "Colombia : Public Expenditure Review," World Bank Publications - Reports 8559, The World Bank Group.
    6. Juan Carlos Echeverry & Jorge Alexander Bonilla & Andrés Moya, 2006. "Rigideces Institucionales Y Flexibilidad Presupuestaria: Los Casos De Argentina, Colombia, México Y Perú," Documentos CEDE 3475, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    7. Echeverry, Juan Carlos & Bonilla, Jorge Alexander & Moya, Andrés, 2006. "Rigideces Institucionales y Flexibilidad Presupuestaria: Origen, Motivación y Efectos sobre el Presupuesto," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 2303, Inter-American Development Bank.
    8. Mauricio Olivera & Monica Pachon & Guillermo Perry, 2010. "The Political Economy of Fiscal Reform: The Case of Colombia, 1986-2006," Research Department Publications 4674, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    9. Isidro Hernández Rodríguez, 2001. "El proceso presupuestal colombiano: comentarios a la propuesta de la Misión Alesina," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 3(5), pages 228-245, July-Dece.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fatas, Antonio & Mihov, Ilian, 2006. "The macroeconomic effects of fiscal rules in the US states," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1-2), pages 101-117, January.
    2. Rafal Benecki & Jens Hölscher & Mariusz Jarmuzek, 2006. "Fiscal Transparency and Policy Rules in Poland," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0327, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    3. Ulpiano Ayala Oramas & Roberto Perotti, 2000. "The Colombian budget process," Working Papers Series. Documentos de Trabajo 2535, Fedesarrollo.
    4. Veronica Grembi & Tommaso Nannicini & Ugo Troiano, 2011. "Policy Responses to Fiscal Restraints: A Difference-in-Discontinuities Design," Working Papers 397, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    5. James M. Poterba & Kim Rueben, 1999. "State Fiscal Institutions and the U.S. Municipal Bond Market," NBER Chapters, in: Fiscal Institutions and Fiscal Performance, pages 181-208, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Jonathan Millar, 1997. "The Effects of Budget Rules on Fiscal Performance and Macroeconomic Stabilization," Staff Working Papers 97-15, Bank of Canada.
    7. Jens Dietrichson & Lina Ellegård, 2015. "Institutions improving fiscal performance: evidence from Swedish municipalities," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 22(5), pages 861-886, October.
    8. Blume, Lorenz & Voigt, Stefan, 2013. "The economic effects of constitutional budget institutions," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 236-251.
    9. Jean-Paul Pollin & Jean-Luc Gaffard, 2013. "Pourquoi faut-il séparer les activités bancaires ?," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/1cud3763mom, Sciences Po.
    10. Florian Dorn & Stefanie Gaebler & Felix Roesel, 2021. "Ineffective fiscal rules? The effect of public sector accounting standards on budgets, efficiency, and accountability," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 186(3), pages 387-412, March.
    11. Khemani, Stuti & Wane, Waly, 2008. "Populist fiscal policy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4762, The World Bank.
    12. Alesina, A. & Passalacqua, A., 2016. "The Political Economy of Government Debt," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & Harald Uhlig (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 2599-2651, Elsevier.
    13. Jorge Martinez-Vazquez & Violeta Vulovic, 2017. "How well do subnational borrowing regulations work?," Chapters, in: Naoyuki Yoshino & Peter J. Morgan (ed.), Central and Local Government Relations in Asia, chapter 5, pages 161-220, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Reuter, Wolf Heinrich, 2015. "National numerical fiscal rules: Not complied with, but still effective?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 67-81.
    15. Isidro Hernández Rodríguez, 2001. "El proceso presupuestal colombiano: comentarios a la propuesta de la Misión Alesina," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 3(5), pages 228-245, July-Dece.
    16. James E. Alt & David Dreyer Lassen & David Skilling, 2001. "Fiscal Transparency, Gubernatorial Popularity, and the Scale of Government: Evidence from the States," EPRU Working Paper Series 01-16, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    17. Christoph A. Schaltegger & Lars P. Feld, 2004. "Do Large Cabinets Favor Large Governments? Evidence from Swiss Sub-Federal Jurisdictions," CESifo Working Paper Series 1294, CESifo.
    18. Mariano Tommasi & Miguel Braun, 2002. "Fiscal Rules for Subnational Governments. Some Organizing Principles and Latin American Experiences," Working Papers 44, Universidad de San Andres, Departamento de Economia, revised Mar 2002.
    19. C. Randall HENNING & Martin KESSLER, 2012. "Fiscal Federalism: US History for Architects of Europe’s Fiscal Union," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 6, pages 1-31.
    20. Marcela Eslava, 2011. "The Political Economy Of Fiscal Deficits: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(4), pages 645-673, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Presupuesto; Presupuesto Nacional; Política Fiscal; Finanzas Públicas; Descentralización; Colombia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H6 - Public Economics - - National Budget, Deficit, and Debt
    • H61 - Public Economics - - National Budget, Deficit, and Debt - - - Budget; Budget Systems
    • H3 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:col:000123:003574. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Patricia Monroy (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fedesco.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.