Public expenditure in the UK: how measures matter
Public expenditure in the UK: how measures matter
复制标题
英国的公共支出：措施的重要性
DOI：
10.1111/j.1467-985x.2006.00397.x
复制
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
I. McLean
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Soroka;Christopher Wlezien;I. McLean
总结：研究一段时间内的支出需要可靠的数据。 然而，目前尚不清楚英国是否存在此类数据。两个公布的功能支出数据来源-国家统计局的“蓝皮书”和英国财政部的公共支出统计分析（PESA）-依赖于使用链接年方法对过去支出的估计，而不是在功能定义发生变化时重新计算实际支出数字。我们评估了英国的各种支出措施。具体来说，我们做两件事。首先，我们提出了一个新的，第三，一组支出数字应用时间上一致的功能定义PESA微数据。其次，我们比较了这三种方法。我们的分析表明，国家统计局和PESA的数据差异很大，特别是在某些功能方面，即在某些情况下，这两种措施意味着完全不同的历史。原始PESA数据和我们的新措施之间的差异平均不太明显，尽管显着差异是明显的，特别是逐年。
Summary. Studying spending over time requires reliable data. It is not clear that such data exist in the UK, however. The two published sources of functional spending numbers—the Office for National Statistics's ‘blue book’ and Her Majesty's Treasury's Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses (PESA)—rely on estimates of past spending, using a link year method, rather than recalculating actual spending figures when functional definitions change. We assess the various measures of spending in the UK. Specifically, we do two things. First, we present a new, third, set of spending numbers applying temporally consistent functional definitions to PESA microdata. Second, we compare the three measures. Our analyses indicate that the Office for National Statistics and PESA data differ quite markedly, especially for certain functions, i.e. in some cases the two measures imply completely different histories. The differences between the original PESA data and our new measures are less pronounced on average, though significant differences are evident, especially year by year.