Valtiokonsernin talousohjauksen tila - tuki vai taakka?

Abstract

Arviointitutkimus koskee Suomen talouden ytimen, valtiokonsernin talousohjauksen tilaa vuosien 1987-2008 uudistuskauden jälkeen. Mihin oli tultu vuonna 2008 ja miten talousohjausjärjestelmä toimii? Arvioinnin kohteena on myös se, miten ohjausjärjestelmän tila vastaa 2010-luvun haasteita.

Arviointiaineiston muodostavat uudistuskauden dokumentit sekä ohjausjärjestelmän kaikkien tasojen eduskunnan, hallituksen, valtiovarainministeriön, ministeriöiden, virastojen ja laitosten sekä tarkastusviranomaisten haastattelut. Vastaavaa lähestymistapaa ei suomalaisessa hallinnontutkimuksessa ole aikaisemmin sovellettu. Arviointi tukeutuu kompleksisuusteoreettiseen viitekehykseen. Kompleksisuusteoriaa ei ole myöskään vastaavalla tavalla hyödynnetty. Tutkimus on siten sekä lähestymistapansa että teoriaulottuvuutensa osalta pioneerityötä, jota ei ole voitu perustaa aiempaan tutkimukseen. Sellaisena se avaa, vaatii ja osoittaa useita jatkotutkimustarpeita.

Tutkimuksen päätuloksia ovat ensinnäkin se, että talousohjauksen ytimen, finanssipolitiikan ohjausrakenne on tasapainossa uudistustavoitteiden kanssa ja sellaisena se tukee talouden kokonaishallintaa.

Toiseksi tutkimustulokset osoittavat, että tulosohjaustavoitteet, tuottavuus, taloudellisuus ja vaikuttavuus eivät ole toteutuneet talousarviolain edellyttämällä tavalla. Laki ja käytännön toiminta ovat kaukana tasapainosta. Lain vaatimukset ovat taakkana toimijoille. Taakka ei kuitenkaan näy suoraan menoina momenteilla ja siksi se ei ole saanut osakseen ansaitsemaansa huomiota.

Kolmantena uudistustavoitteena ollut demokraattisen ohjauksen vahvistaminen näyttää valtiokonsernin osalta rakenteellisesti toteutuneen. Toimivuuden kannalta rakenne on kuitenkin vielä niin uusi, että erityisesti eduskunnan näkökulmasta sen toimivuutta on vaikea arvioida.

2010-luvun haasteiden kannalta tutkimuksessa tulee esiin joukko riskitekijöitä. Yksi niistä on talousohjauksen päätoimijan, valtiovarainministeriön ohjausrakenne. Se näyttää olevan epätasapainossa ministeriön kasvaneiden vastuiden kanssa. Taloudellisesti vaikeina aikoina valtiovarainministeriön rooli lisäksi korostuu järjestelmälogiikan mukasesti talouden tasapainottajana. Ministeriön ohjausrakenteella on yleistä merkitystä, koska se heijastuu koko hallinnon talousohjaukseen. Se voi olla sille joko tukena tai taakkana.

In the administrative reforms of 1987-2008 in Finland the state as a whole was divided into three parts the core state, autonomous parts and actors operating in market conditions. The structural division was taken further when in 2010 the universities were split off from the financial governance of the core state to join the autonomous actors. Each part of the state body has its own financial governance. The study is confined to reforms in the system of financial governance of a state concern (core state) and the functionality of the system of governance after the reforms.

This is an evaluative study assessing first the reforms in the structure and governance tools and thereafter their functionality. The structural research is based chiefly on documentary material from the era of reform. The functionality of the structures is evaluated from the perspectives of Parliament, the Government, the Ministry of Finance, the ministries, agencies and institutions and also the inspectorate. The functionality evaluation is based on 96 personal interviews with actors in charge of governance, the elite in financial governance. The object of the evaluation was the main finances under overall control and the objectives set for management by results of improving productivity, economy of operations and effectiveness. As the reforms progressed, it became a political objective to strengthen democracy or political governance in financial governance. This, too, was made a target of evaluation.

The evaluation relies on the concepts of complexity theory. It was the working hypothesis of the study that through the concepts of the theory it would be possible to explain and comprehend reform processes, the functionality of the reforms and the problems experienced in them. In the study of the structure the main criterion was the complexity theory concept far from a state of equilibrium and in the study of functionality the concept of significance . No such complexity theory based study in the field of administrative science has so far been presented in Finland. Thus on the basis of the study the applicability of complexity theory to the research of reform processes and the functionality of reforms was evaluated.

In the study of structure the research question was how after the reforms of 1987-2008 the governance structure of a state financial governance system is in a state of equilibrium with the goals of the reforms.

The question in the study of functionality was how the financial governance system of a state concern functioned after the reforms from the perspectives of various actors. Likewise thereafter an answer was sought in the nature of triangulation to how the situation of the financial governance system structure and functionality appear to be in equilibrium with the challenges to financial governance apparent in the 2010s. Is the financial governance system a support, burden or risk to the challenges of the 2010s?

In summary the answers to the research questions in light of the evaluation of the structure and functionality data are as follows: 1. The core of financial governance, the governance structure of financial policy and its functionality would appear to be almost in equilibrium with the goals of financial overall administration. In this respect the structure also supports overall financial governance. 2. The objectives of productivity, economical and efficacy in management by results would appear to be very far from being in equilibrium with respect to the requirements of the budgetary legislation (Talousarviolaki). Due to shortcomings in accounting and evaluation systems the objectives has not been achieved. Thus the management by results structure would appear to be a burden on financial governance and administration of the state economy as a whole. The structure of management by results would appear to be in a state of disintegration 3. The aim of strengthening democracy through the structural reforms of the 2000s appears to have been achieved. However, the structure is still mostly so new that its functionality, especially as regards Parliament, is difficult to evaluate. The structure appears mostly to support overall financial management, but this may entail risks from the perspective of overall financial management. 4. The situation of financial governance, from the perspective of the challenges of the 2010s would appear, as far as financial policy is concerned to be almost in equilibrium with the policy challenges, but from the perspective of overall financial management this would not appear to be the case in all respects; the situation in governance is likely to require reforms and attention to the obvious risk factors latent therein.

The study permits the evaluation that complexity theory, a derivative of systems theory, would appear to be applicable to the research of reforms of complex systems and their functionality and to offer opportunities to explain and comprehend the successes and failures of reforms.