A budget is an enterprising plan prepared and submitted by a responsible executive. They have technical, political and economic basis. Budgets have definite time and in most cases based on previous periods. There are primarily two basic elements in a public budget. The first one is revenue and the second one is expenses. Revenues are a resultant of taxes while expenses include current spending on goods and services. Most expenses are government investment expenditures and consumption. Examples of government expenses are research expenditure, infrastructure investment and transfer payments such as retirement and unemployment benefits. Although public budgets are economical in nature, they are not purely so like private budgets. Different groups base public budgets on allocating scarce resources to the best economic use possible as well as attainment of benefits. Overall, the most significant point to note is that there should be balance between the revenues and expenses.
Co-production involves a simple dichotomization of governmental roles (Shafrtitz and Hyde 2011). Therefore, it is distinct from other forms of public arrangement. It re-conceptualizes fellow stakeholders and the government as partners in the definition of a problem, making policies and implementation. This enhances co-learning, resource use and enhances connections. Denhardt advocate for a change in approach from a command and control to coproduction, something he himself admits is not simple. Despite scholarly research that suggests the advantages of co-production, there are a number of publications which describe its implementation that reflect on the rarity of the practice and the limited attention given to the commonly used practice. Indeed, in some areas co-production has been discovered and implemented with full success.
Levine, in his literature about cutback management, touches on a number of issues. Public administration studies on cutbacks reached their apex in the early 1980s but vanished only to raise mush later in the new millennium. The current published works on public administration have more long-term concern solutions. They look at the relationship among reforms, cuts and the necessity principles for management of new government responsibilities. This literature also highlights issues of declining citizen trust, general attitudes towards government, expectations and the role of public leadership roles. All these issues have been addressed.
One of the cutback tactics addressed by Levine is referred to as across the board versus targeted cuts. This strategy states that when an organization is faced by fiscal stress which may demand spending cuts, it may either delay the cuts by denying the problem or it may actually implement the cuts. He calls this the ‘Tooth Fairy Syndrome’. This is epitomized by the unwillingness of by the managers to believe in the talks about the cuts. The obvious distinction between across-the-board and targeted cuts is the fact that the former cuts equated amounts while the latter cuts different amounts for all institutions.
The second cutback tactic discussed by Levine is called advantages and disadvantages of decrementalism versus targeted cuts. This strategy calls for strategic prioritization and comprehensive analysis of decremental approaches to fiscal crisis. The main advantage of decrementalism is that it reduces the cost of decision-making. In addition, it is perceived to be equitable and minimizes conflict. After identifying the conflicts, this strategy aims at across-the-board solutions without going through multiple organs in the organization.
These tactics as proposed by Levine are able to solve the problem of public administration. If targeted cuts can be clearly differentiated from the across-the-board cuts and duly implemented practically, then the public organization can fix the problem. Likewise, if the advantages and disadvantages of decrementalism can be clearly stated and used for the advantage of the organization, then I also believe the problem will be fixed.
References
Levine, J., & Getlein, F. (2006). Jack Levine. New York: H.N. Abrams.
Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (2012). The SAGE handbook of public administration. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Shafritz, J. M., & Hyde, A. C. (2011). Classics of public administration (7th ed.). Oak Park, Ill: Moore Pub. Co.
