IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/pbudge/v46y2026i2p29-46.html

A Comparative Analysis of Budget Forecasting Methods: A Systematic Literature Review Covering the 1983–2024 Period

Author

Listed:
  • Berat Kara
  • Hasan Şengüler

Abstract

This study systematically analyzes 69 peer‐reviewed works comparing budget forecasting methods. It explores methodological evolution, geographic distribution, and evaluation trends. Four phases of development are identified: statistical methods, diversification, machine learning, and deep learning. A division emerges between traditional and next‐generation techniques. Geographically, 43% of studies focus on the United States, while developing economies remain underrepresented. In evaluation, MAPE, RMSE, and MAE dominate, with directional errors largely neglected. Findings show that optimal method choice depends on context, supporting a pluralistic, context‐sensitive approach rather than universal reliance on a single forecasting method.

Suggested Citation

  • Berat Kara & Hasan Şengüler, 2026. "A Comparative Analysis of Budget Forecasting Methods: A Systematic Literature Review Covering the 1983–2024 Period," Public Budgeting & Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 29-46, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:pbudge:v:46:y:2026:i:2:p:29-46
    DOI: 10.1111/pbaf.70008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/pbaf.70008
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/pbaf.70008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:bla:pbudge:v:46:y:2026:i:2:p:29-46. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0275-1100 .

    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.