作　　者： ;

机构地区： 华东师范大学人文社会科学学院政治学系

出　　处： 《南京社会科学》 2010年第3期72-78,93,共8页

摘　　要： 对美英经验的比较分析发现:立宪性预算理念、多元否决点的权力结构、融合多元利益表达的程序及减少信息依赖的资源整合为美国预算审议绩效奠定了良好的基石,而历史传统带来的议会预算创议和否决权障碍及实践中逐步走向失衡的权力结构不仅对英国现代议会绩效形成了严峻的挑战,而且还抑制了具体操作程序及辅助资源改革的制度化效力与空间。为避免仅依靠议会自身改革来提升审议绩效的旧有研究的缺陷,后发国家应从预算审议宪政理念的落实,权力结构中预算否决权的合理配置及具有否决力量的公共组织的培育、审议程序及信息资源的完善等关联变量入手进一步提升预算审议绩效。 The empirical comparative analyses about American and Britain practices showed： constitutional responsible ideas, multiple power veto structure, multi-absorbability procedure of interest expression and resources integration with less information dependence laid solid foundation for American better budgetary scrutiny performance; but in Britain the obstacles of historic heritage on parliament initiative and revised power and imbalance power structures not only formed serious challenges of modem parliament budgetary performance but also constrained institutional opportunities of operational procedures and supportable resources reform. Paying more attention to the coupling variables （ the implementation of constitutional ideas, the appropriate allocation of budget amendments powers and the cultivation of public organizations with veto powers, the improvements of procedures and information resources） are important routes to further improve budget scrutiny performance as well as avoid the disadvantages of previous studies, which just relying on parliament＇s own reforms to improve scrutiny performance.

关 键 词： 预算审议 绩效差异 历史制度主义 否决点

领　　域： [政治法律] [政治法律]