IDENTIFYING THE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS IN PUBLIC SECTOR A CROSS-COUNTRY

Abstract

In recent years, performance budgeting system is very popular among practitioners and academics. Both OECD and European countries focus on this system to improve their fiscal performance. However, there are some difficulties to set performance indicators.

There are different ministries for providing social demand in public sector. And it's not easy to set performance indicators for different services in public sector. There are many studies about the judiciary in law and economics literature. But there are few studies about efficiency of judiciary, performance of judiciary and budgeting in judiciary system. Identifying the performance indicators in public sector is the most important process in performance budgeting system. Because of the characteristic of the public services like judicial system-sometimes it can be hard to define and identify performance indicators or set goals for performance management.

This study aims to analyze how countries solve this problem. The study compares Dutch and Turkish legal system budgetary process and performance indicators, which relate to the strategies of judiciary by using Ministry of Justice data of two countries. There are two main differences between Dutch Justice System and Turkish Justice System. One of them is the Council. In Turkey there is not a Council like in Netherlands. The Council has an important role in both organization and budget process. Second is court's autonomy. Courts in Turkish judiciary system are not autonomous like Dutch. These two differences affect budgetary process of county judicial system.