Budget oversight in territorial autonomies: A comparative analysis of Hong Kong and Macao
| Author | Brian C.H. Fong |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211033816 |
| Published date | 01 March 2023 |
| Date | 01 March 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Budget oversight in
territorial autonomies:
A comparative analysis
of Hong Kong and Macao
Brian C.H. Fong
National Sun Yat-sen University, Taiwan, China
Abstract
Traditionally, comparative budgeting scholars have focused on analysing budget oversight
at the sovereign state level. Budget oversight at the territorial autonomy level remains
largely under-investigated. Drawing on the Open Budget Survey methodology, this
study is a pioneering attempt to compare the budget oversight institutions and practices
in Hong Kong and Macao under the ‘one country, two systems’model. This study finds
that the varying practices of budget oversight of Hong Kong and Macao are the conse-
quence of their different bases of opposition politics, including democratic opposition,
the media and civil society. This study extends the research focus of existing comparative
budgeting literature from sovereign states to territorial autonomies. Thus, it has import-
ant implications for budget oversight analysis and policy worldwide.
Points for practitioners
This article uses comparative studies of Hong Kong and Macao to illustrate how different
bases of opposition politics have led to varying practices of budget oversight. For
policymakers, the lesson from the comparative studies is that the rise of democratic
opposition, the media and civil society will bring about pressures for budget oversight.
More policy learning is necessary for policymakers across democracies and semi-
democracies to share the experiences of handling the politics of budget oversight.
Keywords
budget oversight, Hong Kong, Macao, open budget survey, public budgeting, territorial
autonomies
Corresponding author:
Brian C.H. Fong, 70 Lienhai Road., Kaohsiung 80424, Taiwan, China., College of Social Sciences, National
Sun Yat-sen University.
Email: brian.fong@mail.nsysu.edu.tw
Article
International
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
International Review of Administrative
Sciences
2023, Vol. 89(1) 292–311
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00208523211033816
journals.sagepub.com/home/ras
Introduction
Currently, comparative research on public budget oversight is overwhelmingly focused
on the sovereign state. Over the years, several researchers have developed comparative
indices to examine the budget oversight operations of institutions worldwide (IBP,
2020; Santiso, 2009; Wehner, 2006). However, the nature and characteristics of
budget oversight in sub-state jurisdictions, particularly in territorial autonomies with
extensive fiscal powers, remain unclear.
Given the growing role of territorial autonomies in managing their own public
finances, this study aims to address this hitherto underexplored research area through a
comparative study of Hong Kong and Macao. The rest of this article is divided into
five sections. The first section reviews the existing state-centric literature on budget over-
sight. The second provides a research background of the binary cases of Hong Kong and
Macao, while the third sets out the research design of this study. The fourth section pre-
sents and discusses the research findings. Finally, the fifth section concludes the study by
exploring future research directions for comparative budgeting studies at the territorial
autonomy level.
Research context
Public budgeting is primarily concerned with the use of public resources, a process that
necessitates a great degree of accountability. Therefore, budget oversight –or the institu-
tions and activities designed to hold the government accountable to the legislature and the
supreme audit institution (SAI) throughout the different stages of the budget cycle
(Warner, 2018) –is commonly regarded as an important component of good governance.
Recently, budget oversight has been promoted by international organisations, such as the
United Nations (UN), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), particularly during the COVID-19
pandemic (IMF, 2020; OECD, 2020; UN, 2017: 134–143). Over time, the importance
of budget oversight, both theoretical and practical, has driven the global comparative
budgeting scholarship to investigate and compare the budget oversight process across dif-
ferent states, using several systematic comparative tools and indices. However, all exist-
ing comparative indices adopt a state-centric perspective and study budget oversight only
at the sovereign state level.
Wehner (2006) used a survey of budgeting procedures and developed an index to
compare the legislative oversight of 36 democratic countries. He assessed the legisla-
tures’oversight functions against six institutional benchmarks, namely, amendment
powers, reversionary budgets, executive flexibility at the implementation stage, the
timing of the budgets, legislative committee systems and budgetary information.
Santiso (2009) devised a quantitative index to assess the political economy of budget
oversight in 10 Latin American countries, based on the parameters of authentication,
authorisation and accounting. The International Budget Partnership’s (IBP’s) comprehen-
sive, fact-based comparative tool –the Open Budget Survey (OBS) –has been an effect-
ive instrument in assessing public budgeting quality since 2006. Based on a standard
Fong 293
To continue reading
Request your trial