TINJAUAN KRITIS PERANAN PEMERINTAH DAERAH TERHADAP KINERJA ANGGARAN: PERSPEKTIF HUBUNGAN PRINCIPAL DAN AGENT

Authors

  • Cepi Pahlevi Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Universitas Hasanuddin, Indonesia, Makassar, Indonesia
  • Muhammad Idrus Taba Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Universitas Hasanuddin, Indonesia, Makassar, Indonesia
  • Muhammad Ismail Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Universitas Hasanuddin, Indonesia, Makassar, Indonesia
  • Mahlia Muis Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Universitas Hasanuddin, Indonesia, Makassar, Indonesia
  • Dian A.S. Parawansa Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Universitas Hasanuddin, Indonesia, Makassar, Indonesia
  • Siti Haerani Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Universitas Hasanuddin, Indonesia, Makassar, Indonesia
  • Haris Maupa Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Universitas Hasanuddin, Indonesia, Makassar, Indonesia
  • Sitti Rahmi Razak Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Muslim Indonesia (UMI), Indonesia, Makassar, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29040/jie.v7i2.9737

Abstract

This article presents a literature review relating to the role of local government on budget performance in three perspectives, namely: how the position and role of local governments towards budget performance, how the government's relationship with the Legislature and the Legislature's relationship with the public in the Principal and Agent Context, and how the Accountability Aspect in the Budgeting Perspective as a Political and Managerial Dimension. The method used is descriptive qualitative with a literature study approach. The results obtained show that, first, in the reform era, local government is seen as an entity that has broader authority. It has the authority to decide on the resources it uses. Second, the relationship between the legislature and the government assumes that the legislature will be the principal and the government the agent. The election process results in a mandate to the legislature to produce laws, oversee the work of the government and ensure all public policies will be implemented as stipulated. Third, In a democratic system, the role of the government, its objectives, policies, priorities and the specific programs it runs are fundamentally political and not managerial matters.

References

Andvig, J. C., Fjeldstad, O.-H., Amundsen, I., Sissener, T., & Søreide, T. (2001). A review of contemporary research.

Brumby, J. (1998). Budgetary Devices that Deliver, presentation to Oxford Policy Management, Oxford,.

Carr, J. B., & Brower, R. S. (2000). Principled opportunism: Evidence from the organizational middle. Public Administration Quarterly, 109–138.

Christensen, J. G. (1992). Hierarchical and contractual approaches to budgetary reform. Journal of theoretical politics, 4(1), 67–91.

Covaleski, M., & Aiken, M. (1986). Accounting and theories of organizations: some preliminary considerations. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 11(4–5), 297–319.

del Valle, C. G., & Morón, E. (2001). The Budgetary Process in Peru: Is Budgetary Participatory Too Risk? Department of Economics, Universidad del Pacifico.

Flack, E. D. (2007). The role of annual reports in a system of accountability for public fundraising charities. Queensland University of Technology.

Fozzard, A. (2001). The basic budgeting problem. London: Overseas Development Institute, Centre for Aid and Public Expenditure (Working Paper 147).

Gilardi, F. (2001). Principal-agent models go to Europe: Independent regulatory agencies as ultimate step of delegation. ECPR General Conference, Canterbury (UK), 6–8.

Groenendijk, N. (1997). A principal-agent model of corruption. Crime, Law and Social Change, 27, 207–229.

Gul, F. A., & Chia, Y. M. (1994). The effects of management accounting systems, perceived environmental uncertainty and decentralization on managerial performance: a test of three-way interaction. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 19(4–5), 413–426.

Gustafson, R. C. (2003). Legislatures and the budget process: an international survey. Legislative Research Series.

Hogye, M. (2002). Local government budgeting. Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative.

HÅ‘gye, M., & McFerren, C. (2002). Local Government Budgeting: The CEE Experience.

Kaplan, R. S. (1984). The evolution of management accounting. Readings in accounting for management control, 586–621.

Keefer, P., & Khemani, S. (2003). The political economy of public expenditures. Background paper for WDR 2004: Making Service Work for Poor People.

Lane, J.-E. (2000). The Public Sector: Concepts, Models and Approaches. London: SAGE Publications.

Lupia, A., & McCubbins, M. D. (2000). Representation or abdication? How citizens use institutions to help delegation succeed. European Journal of Political Research, 37(3), 291–307.

Macintosh, N. B., & Quattrone, P. (2010). Management accounting and control systems: An organizational and sociological approach. John Wiley & Sons.

Markus, M. L., & Pfeffer, J. (1983). Power and the design and implementation of accounting and control systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 8(2–3), 205–218.

Moe, T. M. (1984). The new economics of organization. American journal of political science, 739–777.

Petrie, M. (2002). A framework for public sector performance contracting. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 1(3), 117–153.

Ro, P. M. (1998). Corruption: causes, consequences, and agenda for further research. Finance & Development.

Ross, S. A. (1973). The economic theory of agency: The principal’s problem. The American economic review, 63(2), 134–139.

Santiso, J. (2006). Latin America’s political economy of the possible: beyond good revolutionaries and free-marketeers. Mit Press.

Smith, R. W., & Bertozzi, M. (1996). Principals and agents: An explanatory model for public budgeting. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 10(3), 325–353.

Von Hagen, J. (2002). Fiscal rules, fiscal institutions, and fiscal performance. Vol. XX, No. XX, Issue, Year.

Williams, J. J., Macintosh, N. B., & Moore, J. C. (1990). Budget-related behavior in public sector organizations: Some empirical evidence. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 15(3), 221–246.

Downloads

Published

2023-08-30

How to Cite

Pahlevi, C., Taba, M. I., Ismail, M., Muis, M., Parawansa, D. A., Haerani, S., … Razak, S. R. (2023). TINJAUAN KRITIS PERANAN PEMERINTAH DAERAH TERHADAP KINERJA ANGGARAN: PERSPEKTIF HUBUNGAN PRINCIPAL DAN AGENT. JURNAL ILMIAH EDUNOMIKA, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.29040/jie.v7i2.9737

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 2 (2023): EDUNOMIKA

Section

Articles

Citation Check

Most read articles by the same author(s)