Importance The article discusses the development of methodological approaches to assessing financial risk exposure of federal special-purpose and governmental programs of the Russian Federation. Objectives We devise tools for budgetary planning and public administration of risks using contemporary economic and mathematical methods. Methods The research relies upon methods for probability modeling and economic assessment of risks. This article suggest evaluating the underfunding risk using the Value-at-Risk methodology. We evaluate budgetary and extrabudgetary finance. Results We propose our method for assessing the exposure of federal special-purpose and governmental programs to the risk that they are underfunded from budgetary and extrabudgetary sources. The method is based on contemporary understanding of budgetary planning and uses new techniques to derive managerial information from information on the implementation of governmental programs. The proposed need to be further elaborated so to ensure the higher quality of assessment. Conclusions and Relevance Performance-based budgeting principles require to use new tools for the State policy, budgetary expenditure planning and result forecasting. The proposed method of risk assessment may be effectively applied as one of the modern tools of the budgetary process. The findings may prove helpful for higher efficiency of budgetary planning as part of federal special-purpose and governmental programs.
Miller G.J., Hildreth W.B., Rabin J. Performance-Based Budgeting. An ASPA Classic. Westview Press, 2010, 504 p.
Afanas'ev M.P., Shash N.N. [Russian budgetary reforms: from programs of social and economic development to State programs of the Russian Federation]. Voprosy gosudarstvennogo i munitsipal'nogo upravleniya = Public Administration Issues, 2014, no. 2, pp. 48–64. (In Russ.)
Bogacheva O.V., Lavrov A.M., Yastrebova O.K. [International experience of performance-based budgeting]. Finansy= Finance, 2010, no. 12, pp. 4–14. (In Russ.)
Kizilova I.N. [Program and project method as an innovative management manner in the field of culture]. Kreativnaya ekonomika= Journal of Creative Economy, 2010, no. 9, pp. 108–113. (In Russ.)
Simachev Yu., Kuzyk M. Rossiiskaya politika po stimulirovaniyu innovatsii: evolyutsiya, dostizheniya, problemy i uroki. V kn.: Rossiiskaya ekonomika v 2012 g. Tendentsii i perspektivy. Vyp. 34 [Russian policy for innovation: the evolution, achievements, issues and lessons. In: Russia's economy 2012. Trends and prospects. Issue 34]. Moscow, Gaidar Institute Publ., 2013, pp. 521–571. (In Russ.)
Blinova N.V., Gaganova E.V. [Risk assessment in the development of State programs and public policy: the Russian practice]. Gumanitarnye, sotsial'no-ekonomicheskie i obshchestvennye nauki = Humanities, Socio-Economic and Social Sciences, 2015, no. 11, pp. 52–54. (In Russ.)
Volgarev M.S. [Dynamic risk assessment of the design of State programs]. Sovremennaya nauka: aktual'nye problemy teorii i praktiki. Ser. Ekonomika i pravo = Modern Science: Actual Problems of Theory and Practice. Law and Economics, 2014, no. 9-10, pp. 23–26. (In Russ.)
Toropchenko O.S. [Result-oriented budgeting instruments interrelation in the budgetary process of Russian Federation]. Vestnik Sibirskogo instituta biznesa i informatsionnykh tekhnologii = Bulletin of the Siberian Institute of Business and Information Technologies, 2016, no. 2, pp. 75–80. (In Russ.)
Panov D.V., Chursin A.A., Rusinov A.A. [Methodical approaches to the assessment of probabilistic economic feasibility of actions of the space program taking into account structure of the works included into action]. Biznes v zakone = Business in Law, 2015, no. 6, pp. 184–191. (In Russ.)
Linsmeier T.J., Pearson N.D. Value at Risk. Financial Analysts Journal, 2000, vol. 56, iss. 2, pp. 47–63. doi: Link
Wipplinger E. Philippe Jorion: Value at Risk – The New Benchmark for Managing Financial Risk. Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, 2007, vol. 21, iss. 3, pp. 397–398. doi: Link
Chernozhukov V., Umantsev L. Conditional Value-at-Risk: Aspects of Modeling and Estimation. Empirical Economics, 2001, vol. 26, iss. 1, pp. 271–292. doi: Link
Rockafellar R.T., Uryasev S. Conditional Value-at-Risk for General Loss Distributions. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2002, vol. 26, iss. 7, pp. 1443–1471. doi: Link00271-6
Kupiec P.H. Techniques for Verifying the Accuracy of Risk Measurement Models. The Journal of Derivatives, 1995, vol. 3, iss. 2, pp. 73–84. doi: Link
Pflug G.C. Some Remarks on the Value-at-Risk and the Conditional Value-at-Risk. In: Probabilistic Constrained Optimization: Methodology and Applications. Springer Science and Business Media, 2000, pp. 272–281.
Jorion P. Risk2: Measuring the Risk in Value at Risk. Financial Analysts Journal, 1996, vol. 52, iss. 6, pp. 47–56. doi: Link
Basak S., Shapiro A. Value-at-Risk-Based Risk Management: Optimal Policies and Asset Prices. The Review of Financial Studies, 2001, vol. 14, iss. 2, pp. 371–405. doi: Link
Hendricks D. Evaluation of Value-at-Risk Models Using Historical Data (Digest Summary). Economic Policy Review, 1996, vol. 2, iss. 1, pp. 39–67.