“Stability” and “Competition” in Budgetary Theory

John R. Gist

American Political Science Review, 1982, vol. 76, issue 4, 859-872

Abstract: This article argues that the differences in the findings of the incrementalist budgetary theory of Davis, Dempster, and Wildavsky and the “competition” theory of Natchez and Bupp have been wrongly attributed to the different units of analysis—program or organization—used in these studies. “Competition” as measured by Natchez and Bupp and incremental change as defined by Davis, Dempster, and Wildavsky can both be found among either programs or organizations. The differences in the findings of these theorists depend instead on the particular theoretical construction of budgetary behavior and the budget measures chosen. The same data will support either theory of budgeting if one adopts the theoretical constructs and budget measures peculiar to each theory. Thus the theories are not really in competition with each other.

Date: 1982
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/ ... type/journal_article link to article abstract page (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:76:y:1982:i:04:p:859-872_18

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in American Political Science Review from Cambridge University Press Cambridge University Press, UPH, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8BS UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kirk Stebbing ().