【文章內容簡介】 e, the overall expenditure limit can be viewed as a highly ideological decision. The size of the budget is a reflection of a mitment to provide goods, services, and social protection, and provides the amount of resources that are to be consumed, invested, or transferred. Such a fundamental decision has to be made by political assemblies(., the cabi of ministers and parliament). From another angle, the determination of the expenditure limit is a technical issue, which requires the expertise of professionals in the ministry of finance. A qualified assessment of the room for expenditure has to be based on a projection of available resources— in terms of expected revenue— and an analysis of the adequate fiscal policy given prevailing economic conditions. Parallel to these two perspectives is the risk of insufficient accuracy of macroeconomic and fiscal forecasts. A bias can, in some cases, be explained by inadequate forecasting techniques. Another possibility is the existence of political pressure to paint a positive development. Such a tendency does not have to e as direct interference with the forecasts, but could be the result of civil servants’ unwillingness to present bad news. An implicit assumption in a topdown approach is that the budget process is prehensive, in the sense that all— or at least a significant part of— expenditure is covered by the government budget. The existence of separate budgets through extra budgetary funds or significant use of revenue budgeted and accounted for on a basis, diminishes the disciplining effect of an aggregate expenditure limit. The expenditure limit is also affected by the government’s assessment of the need for countercyclical fiscal policy. Recognizing that in certain circumstances it may be necessary to accelerate the return to equilibrium GDPlevels through expansionary or contractionary fiscal policies, arguments for temporary deviations from the longterm budget balance position have to be taken into account when determining the level of total expenditure. Primarily this involves estimating the effect of the automatic stabilizers on the expenditure side of the budget. In a particularly severe downturn, it may also be necessary to plement the automatic stabilizers with discretionary fiscal policy. A policy stage where the government discusses and establishes sector allocations— preferably in a mediumterm context— provides structure and stability to the budget process. Considering the heterogeneity of constitutional arrangements, public sector management traditions and political conditions, it is difficult to generalize procedures that are appropriation all circumstances. Some elements of an allocative phase appear to be important, however. The allocation of the budget to key sectors is essentially an expression of political priorities. The amount of resources allocated to various objectives such as education, defense, regional development, infrastructure, unemployment support, or social welfare, is the characterizing difference between political parties or factions within parties. Determining the allocation of the budget to overall sectors is, from this perspective, a stage that should attract significant attention, as it is at this time that policies are set. However, a new round of budget preparation does not give unlimited freedom to reassess government policies. For a given year, most expenditure is fixed by legally binding contracts, civil service employment legislation and annual agreements on salary increases, explicit mitments to specific areas