IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/wzbmet/fsii99502.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Der Plumpsack geht um: Berliner Budgetkreisläufe

Author

Listed:
  • Peters, Katharina

Abstract

In der Finanzwissenschaft wird das Modell vom sogenannten Budgetkreislauf genutzt, um das Prozedere der Geldverteilung in öffentlichen Verwaltungen zu beschreiben. Diese Beschreibung gilt immer noch, wo, wie am Beispiel des Landes Berlins zu sehen, die Grundlagen für das Funktionieren des Modells bereits weggebrochen sind: Es ist in diesem Stadtstaat heute kaum mehr möglich, für ein Jahr im voraus festzulegen, wo Ausgaben getätigt werden sollen. Es ist auch nicht mehr möglich, von konstanten Geldmengen für diesen Zeitraum auszugehen und daraus folgernd lassen sich die Gelder auch nicht mehr nach einer festgelegten Abfolge 'bewegen'. Anstelle dessen werden die zu kürzenden Budgets von einer Instanz zur anderen verschoben, wie, um das Bild eines Kinderspiels zu gebrauchen, ein Plumpsack, den man möglichst so geschickt an anderer Stelle plaziert, daß die nun betroffene Instanz nicht gleich reagiert. Der Aufsatz beschreibt mit ethnographischen Mitteln, wie es zu einer äußerst fragilen Koexistenz zwischen dem Budgetkreislauf als Modell und den veränderten Bedingungen der Verteilung öffentlicher Gelder kommt.

Suggested Citation

  • Peters, Katharina, 1999. "Der Plumpsack geht um: Berliner Budgetkreisläufe," Discussion Papers, Research Group Metropolitan City Studies FS II 99-502, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:wzbmet:fsii99502
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/49622/1/301101876.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pentland, Brian T., 1993. "Getting comfortable with the numbers: Auditing and the micro-production of macro-order," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 18(7-8), pages 605-620.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Guénin-Paracini, Henri & Malsch, Bertrand & Paillé, Anne Marché, 2014. "Fear and risk in the audit process," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 264-288.
    2. Olivier Herrbach, 2001. "Audit quality, auditor behaviour and the psychological contract," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 787-802.
    3. Goodson, Brian M. & Grenier, Jonathan H. & Maksymov, Eldar, 2023. "When law students think like audit litigation attorneys: Implications for experimental research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    4. Mohammad Hudaib & Roszaini Haniffa, 2009. "Exploring auditor independence: an interpretive approach," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(2), pages 221-246, January.
    5. Federica De Santis, 2016. "Auditing Standard Change and Auditors' Everyday Practice: A Field Study," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(12), pages 41-54, December.
    6. Namrata Malhotra & Timothy Morris, 2009. "Heterogeneity in Professional Service Firms," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(6), pages 895-922, September.
    7. Lorino, Philippe & Mourey, Damien & Schmidt, Géraldine, 2017. "Goffman's theory of frames and situated meaning-making in performance reviews. The case of a category management approach in the French retail sector," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 32-49.
    8. Bitbol-Saba, Nathalie & Dambrin, Claire, 2019. "“It’s not often we get a visit from a beautiful woman!” The body in client-auditor interactions and the masculinity of accountancy," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    9. Anne Marie Garvey & Laura Parte & Bridget McNally & José Antonio Gonzalo-Angulo, 2021. "True and Fair Override: Accounting Expert Opinions, Explanations from Behavioural Theories, and Discussions for Sustainability Accounting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-23, February.
    10. Duboisée de Ricquebourg, Alan & Maroun, Warren, 2023. "How do auditor rotations affect key audit matters? Archival evidence from South African audits," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(2).
    11. repec:dau:papers:123456789/3505 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Bay, Charlotta, 2018. "Makeover accounting: Investigating the meaning-making practices of financial accounts," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 44-54.
    13. Jones, Keith T. & Hunt, Steven C. & Chen, Clement C., 2008. "Auditors’ performance evaluations: An experimental analysis of the effects of initial impressions and task-specific experience on information later recalled," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 213-224.
    14. Power, Michael K., 2003. "Auditing and the production of legitimacy," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 379-394, May.
    15. Ruhnke, Klaus & Schmitz, Stefanie, 2019. "Review engagements – structure of audit firm methodology and its situational application in Germany," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    16. G. Sarens & I. De Beelde, 2006. "Internal audit: the expert in providing comfort to the audit committee. The case of risk management and internal control," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 06/428, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    17. Foster, Benjamin P. & McClain, Guy & Shastri, Trimbak, 2010. "Impact on pre-and post-sarbanes oxley users’ perceptions by incorporating the auditor’s fraud detection responsibility into the auditor’s internal control report," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 107-113.
    18. Suddaby, Roy & Saxton, Gregory D. & Gunz, Sally, 2015. "Twittering change: The institutional work of domain change in accounting expertise," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 52-68.
    19. Evgeniy M. Ozhegov & Daria Teterina, 2018. "The Ensemble Method For Censored Demand Prediction," HSE Working papers WP BRP 200/EC/2018, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    20. repec:dau:papers:123456789/3503 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Mueller, Frank, 2018. "Taking Goffman seriously: Developing Strategy-as-Practice," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 16-30.
    22. Paula Jarzabkowski & Sarah Kaplan, 2015. "Strategy tools-in-use: A framework for understanding “technologies of rationality” in practice," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 537-558, April.

    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:zbw:wzbmet:fsii99502. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wzbbbde.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.