Long-run and short-run budgeting: empirical evidence for canada, uk, and usa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper tests public budgeting as a long-run and short-run process; political decision makers strive to head toward budgetary balance over the long run but are constrained in the short run and follow incremental decision-making. First, the budget equilibrium theory is stated and is used to explain the relationship between revenues and expenditures. Second, the interaction between expenditures and revenues is tested with a vector error correction model for Canada, UK and the US, using annual time series data between 1948 and 2000. The results show that, in the long-run, revenues are the driving force behind the budget in Canada; in the UK expenditures force the budget toward balance. In the short-run, incrementalism occurs in both of these countries. The most interesting finding is for the United States where on-budget revenues and expenditures both push the budget toward balance over the longrun but there is no incrementalism in the process in the short-run. This, of course, is contrary to much of the existing literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".