ABSTRACT
References......................................................................................................................................430
Public budgeting is multi-functional, multi-dimensional, and multi-disciplinary. All three terms
convey the complex and contextual nature of budgeting. Budgeting is complex and contextual
because it varies by the level of government, jurisdictional characteristics, environmental con-
ditions, the use of analytical tools, as well as the behavior of budget and non-budget actors. The
following description succinctly captures the variation in budget practices:
The variation in context and complexity makes conceptualizing the budget process difficult. In
fact, the evolution of budgeting can be seen as a struggle to define budget practices and change
them. For a long time, Verne Lewis’s (1952) call for a predictive budget theory has shaped the
struggle. However, contemporary students consider the pursuit not only far-fetched but also
impossible (Rubin, 2000; Wildavsky, 1992; Keil and Elliot, 1992). In fact, the contemporary
focus in budget research has been moving away from predictive theory to descriptive understanding
(Grizzle, 1998; Rubin, 2000). One way to advance descriptive understanding is to account for
budget decision making as an institutional practice.
