摘要
2003年以来的“审计风暴”“问责风暴”标志着我国政治体制改革中责任政府建设提上了议事日程。党的十七大报告明确指出要加快行政管理体制改革,建设服务型政府,健全经济责任审计。乡镇在我国的政权层级组织机构中处于最基层,是党和政府联系群众的直接承担者；乡镇领导干部的经济责任履行情况对农村发展至关重要,是农村经济发展和社会稳定的重要因素。因此,研究乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价有着重要意义。完善乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价,有利于强化权力约束监督、完善权力运行机制；有利于加强干部监督、评价与考核,完善干部激励与约束机制；有利于促使乡镇领导干部树立科学发展观和正确政绩观,实现农村经济健康持续发展。本文借鉴国家审计理论、委托代理与博弈理论、政府治理理论、公共选择及反腐败机制理论,应用制度分析、历史分析、博弈分析相结合的方法,对乡镇领导干部经济责任审计进行了理论分析；利用判断抽样问卷调查资料,应用层次分析法构建乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价指标体系,并明确了评价标准、各项指标的权重与方法。通过研究,构建了综合评价模型,实际验证了A、B两个被审计单位的审计效果,提出了加强审计评价结果运用的政策建议。
1研究内容
(1)领导干部经济责任审计理论借鉴。运用国家审计理论、委托代理与博弈理论、政府治理理论、公共选择与现代反腐败机制理论等分析乡镇领导干部履职行为及经济责任审计动因,构建其评价内容、评价指标、评价标准、评价方法、评价结果运用等相互之问的内在逻辑,构建论文框架结构。
(2)乡镇领导干部经济责任审计的现实考察。从经济责任审计的历史沿革分析乡镇领导干部经济责任审计的特点、内容与重点、程序与方法、实施现状、取得的成果与存在问题。
(3)乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价指标体系构建。在对现有研究成果评述基础上,构建评价内容体系——“经济管理责任”“经济决策责任”“经济政策执行责任”“经济发展责任”“廉洁从政责任”。基于受托经济责任拓展角度,将社会责任、环境保护责任、可持续发展责任等也纳入其中。根据评价内容与原则,结合实地调查问卷资料,筛选评价指标；根据专家调查问卷,运用层次分析法构造判断矩阵计算各指标权重,从而构建评价指标体系。
(4)乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价标准与评价方法。根据乡镇领导干部经济责任审计的具体要求,确定各个审计评价指标的评价标准,具体评分时,采用定性与定量相结合的评价方法。
(5)乡镇领导干部经济责任审计综合评价模型及应用。根据评价指标体系、评价标准与评价方法,构建乡镇领导干部经济责任审计综合评价模型,并通过两个案例检验模型的实用性。
(6)乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价结果运用研究。分析目前经济责任审计评价结果运用现状及存在问题,提出提高审计质量、写好审计报告、健全联动问责机制、提高协作能力、完善审计结果公告制度等审计评价结果的应用措施,建立救济制度以保护被审计对象及其单位部门的正当权益,同时降低审计风险。
2研究方法
(1)以规范研究方法为主。定性分析将制度分析、历史分析和博弈分析方法相结合,侧重理论演绎和归纳,引入国家审计理论、委托—代理理论、公共选择与反腐败机制理论、政府治理理论等分析工具和博弈分析方法；定量分析方法主要是数理统计分析,应用层次分析法分析确定乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价指标的权重。
(2)调查方法主要以问卷调查和实地调查为主。采用判断抽样方法,选择荣昌县审计局、荣昌县委组织部等部门的工作人员、审计人员作为专家,以荣昌县相关乡镇党政机关干部及工作人员、财政所、行政村领导及会计等作为调研对象,进行评价指标筛选及权重确定,通过图书馆、网络等途径获得有关研究对象的整体信息和间接资料。
(3)案例分析法。通过两个镇街党政领导干部经济责任审计,检验乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价综合模型的实用性。
3研究结论
(1)乡镇领导干部经济责任审计在理论和实践中取得了突出成绩,但还存在着较多的问题。作为独具中国特色的党政领导干部经济责任审计,既包括合规审计又包括绩效审计的内容,是一种复合性审计类型,丰富和发展了传统审计理论。十多年来,各地积极进行乡镇领导干部经济责任审计探索与实践,通过审计客观评价乡镇领导干部受托经济责任的履行情况,对强化权力约束监督、促进党风廉政建设、加强干部监督、评价与考核,完善干部激励与约束机制、促进乡镇领导干部树立科学发展观和正确政绩观等方面起到了积极作用。然而,实践中还存在审计力量与审计任务相矛盾、审计监督滞后、审计范围不规范、评价困难等问题,最突出的是评价指标体系不健全,缺乏切实可行的评价标准。因而为保证经济责任审计效率的实现,建立实用、科学合理的经济责任审计评价指标体系及评价标准,进行综合评价已成为当务之急。
(2)构建乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价指标体系。本文将评价内容概括为经济管理责任、经济决策责任、经济政策执行责任、经济发展责任和廉洁从政责任5个方面。根据文献梳理和调查访谈,全面衡量经济责任,将构建和谐社会所要求的加强基础建设、发展社会公共事业、耕地保护、共同富裕等内容纳入评价指标体系设计中,通过调查问卷分析筛选出20个评价指标。根据专家调查问卷资料,应用层次分析法确定评价指标的权重。由此,构建了乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价指标体系。
(3)确定乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价指标的评价标准。定性指标的评价标准分为三个档次,实际应用时通过问卷调查或座谈访问等方式得到被审计对象相应指标的档次,采用五分制打分。定量指标评价标准则根据法律、规章和政策规定,结合县(市)党委、政府对乡镇年度考核的指标、任期责任目标及国家统计部门规定的统计指标,如历史水平、行业水平等来确定评价标准。在具体评分时将定性评价方法与定量评价方法相结合。
(4)构建乡镇领导干部经济责任审计综合评价模型并进行实证应用。评价主体根据评价标准对评价客体进行审计评价,采用定性或定量的评价方法确定各评价指标的分值。这“分值”与该评价指标的权重的乘积即为该项评价指标的加权评分,将各指标的加权评分加总就得到乡镇领导干部经济责任审计综合评价的总分。在综合评价时,可换算为百分制的综合得分。对应四个档次的总体评价结论：优秀、良好、一般、差。本文通过两个镇街领导干部经济责任审计实际资料对综合评价模型进行了应用,检验表明综合评价模型具有较强的实用性。
(5)乡镇领导干部经济责任审计作用的发挥取决于审计评价结果的运用。审计评价成果转化运用就是从机制、体制层面促进整改,经济责任审计的最终目的就是审计评价结果的运用。评价只是工具,关键是审计评价的结果得到充分有效的运用,才是经济责任审计工作的落脚点和最终目的。为此,应充分认识党政领导干部经济责任审计评价的作用,提高审计质量,写好审计报告和审计结果报告；进一步健全联动问责机制,充分利用各方面信息,提高协作能力；完善党政领导干部经济责任审计结果公告制度；建立救济制度以保护被审计对象及其单位部门,同时降低审计风险。
4创新点
(1)建立乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价指标。根据社会发展的现实需求,对乡镇领导干部经济责任审计的内容和范围进行拓展,从“经济管理责任”“经济决策责任”“经济政策执行责任”“经济发展责任”“廉洁从政责任”五个评价内容设计评价指标,通过问卷调查进行指标筛选,最终确定了20个乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价指标,注重传统评价指标的同时注入了可持续发展方面的指标,形成了新的、比较完整的指标体系。
(2)构建乡镇领导干部经济责任审计综合评价模型。根据专家调查问卷,应用层次分析法构造判断矩阵,计算确定各评价指标的权重,这较之目前在此类审计中所用的主观确定权重(或不考虑各指标权重)就更具科学性；同时,确定各指标的评价标准,将定性评价与定量评价方法相结合,主观判断客观量化,从而构建乡镇领导干部经济责任审计综合评价模型。
"Audit storm" and "accountability storm" since2003symbolizes that the construction of responsible government in China's political reform has put forward to the historical agenda. The report to the Seventeenth Party Congress clearly pointed out the need to speed up the administrative system, to build a service-oriented government and to improve economic responsibility audit. Township is the most basic administrative regional units in China's organizations. It is the direct stakeholders of the masses of the party and government. How the township leading cadres'economic responsibility to fulfill relates to the overall situation of rural work and rural economic development and social important element of stability. Therefore, It is of great significance to research the evaluation of economic responsibility audit of township leadership cadres. To improve the evaluation of economic responsibility audit of the township leading cadres helps to strengthen power and to bind the supervision, improve the mechanism of the exercise of power. It also helps to strengthen the cadre supervision, evaluation and assessment and perfect the cadre and incentive and restraint mechanisms as far as to promote the township leading cadres to establish the scientific concept of development and the correct view to achieve rural economic health and sustainable development. In this paper, we reference to auditing theory, principal-agent game theory in economics, governance, public choice and anti-corruption mechanisms in political science. We also combine with institutional analysis, historical analysis and game analysis method to analyze theoretically economic responsibility audit of the leadership of the township cadres. According to random sampling questionnaire and survey data, we construct the evaluation index system of the economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres with analytic hierarchy process. We also define evaluation criteria and the weight of each index and evaluation method. Through research, the paper builds a comprehensive evaluation model and verifies actually the effect of the audit of the audited entity A, B. At last we put forward to the policy recommendations to strengthen the use of audit evaluation results.
1Main contents of study
(1)Economic responsibility auditing theory draws. It analyses the performance of duties of township leading cadres and motives of economic responsibility audit with the national audit theory, principal-agent game theory, the governance theory, public choice theory and modern anti-corruption mechanisms and so on in order to build the internal logic among the evaluation content, evaluation index, evaluation criteria, evaluation methods and the use of evaluation results and build the frame structure of the paper.
(2) The reality inspection of economic responsibility audit of the township leading cadres. It analyses the history and the characteristics of economic responsibility audit, content and priorities, procedures and methods, the status of implementation. At last, the paper analyzes the status quo and problems of the implementation of economic responsibility audit.
(3) The building of evaluation index system of economic responsibility audit of the township leading cadres. On the basis of review existing research, the paper constructs the content system--"economic management","economic decision-making","implementation of economic policy","economic development "and "honest and upright administration". Based on the view of expanding of economic responsibility, we put social responsibility, environmental responsibility and sustainable development to the content system of evaluation. According to the content and principles of evaluation, Combined with field survey questionnaire data to screen; According to the expert questionnaire, it uses the hierarchy analysis process method to construct the judgment matrix and calculate the index weight, thereby building evaluation index system.
(4) Evaluation criteria and evaluation methods of economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres. According to the specific requirements of economic responsibility audit of the township leading cadres to determine the evaluation criteria of each evaluation index, using a combination of qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods to score.
(5) Comprehensive evaluation model of economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres and its application. According to the evaluation index system, evaluation criteria and evaluation methods to construct comprehensive evaluation model of economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres and test the practicality of the model with two cases.
(6) Research on the application of evaluation result of economic responsibility audit of the township leading cadres. By analysing current status and problems of the application of evaluation results of economic responsibility audit to propose the application measures such as to improve the quality of audits, to write audit reports, to sound linkage accountability mechanisms, to improve collaboration and to improve the system of audit results announcement and to establish relief system to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the audit object and its unit sector, while reducing audit risk.
2Research methods
(1)Mainly to normative research method. Qualitative analysis combine system analysis, historical analysis with game analysis method, focusing on the theory of deductive and inductive, the introduction of analysis tools such as national audit theory, the principal-agent theory, the theory of public choice anti-corruption mechanisms, governance theory and game analysis method; Quantitative analysis method is mainly mathematical statistical analysis. Application of AHP analysis determines evaluation index weight of economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres.
(2) Questionnaires and field surveys are mainly survey methods. With random sampling method, It selects auditors of Rongchang Audit Office, working staff of Rongchang Committee Organization Department and other departments as experts. At the same time,it selects the related party and government organs cadres and staff of township, finance, administrative village leadership and accounting in Rongchang County as researchobject in order to screen evaluation indexes and determined weights. We get the overall information and indirect information by the library, network, and other ways.
(3) Case analysis. The paper tests the practicality of comprehensive evaluation model of economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres with two Towns in party and government cadres economic responsibility audit.
3Basic conclusions
(1) Economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres has made outstanding achievements in the theory and practice, but there are still many problems. As a unique Chinese characteristic, Economic responsibility audit of party and government leaders is a complex audit type, including compliance audits and performance audit, which enriches and develops the traditional audit theory. More than a decade, all over the country exploration and practice actively economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres. By auditing to evaluate objectively the fulfillment of economic responsibility of the township leading cadres entrusted, it has played a positive role in strengthening the powers constraints supervision, promoting honest government, strengthening the cadre supervision and evaluation and assessment, improveing the cadres incentive and restraint mechanisms and promoting township leading cadres to establish the scientific concept of development and the correct view of achievements. However, in practice there are problems such as the contradiction between audit forces with audit task, audit supervision lags behind, the scope of the audit is not standardized, difficult to evaluate issues and so on. The most prominent is that the evaluation system is not perfect and the lack of practical evaluation criteria. Thus, in order to ensure the realization of economic responsibility audit efficiency, it has become imperative to establish practical, scientific and rational economic responsibility audit evaluation index system and evaluation criteria for evaluating comprehensively.
(2) Construction the evaluation index system of economic responsibility audit of the township leading cadres. This article evaluates the evaluation content from five responsibilities such as economic management, economic decision-making, implementation of economic policy, economic development and honest and upright administration. Through combing the literature and survey interviews, comprehensive measure of economic responsibility, and design the evaluation index system which include strengthen the infrastructure, development of social and public utilities, farmland protection and common prosperitr equired to build a harmonious society. By analysis questionnaires, it identifies20evaluation indexes. Based on the expert questionnaire data, it determines the weight of evaluation index with AHP. Thus, we construct the evaluation index system of economic responsibility audit of the township leading cadres.
(3) Determination the evaluation criteria of the evaluation indicators of economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres. The basic evaluation criteria of qualitative indicators are divided into three grades. When practical application,we can access to the grade with the fifth of the system of the corresponding indicators of the audited object through questionnaires or discussions; The evaluation criteria quantitative indicators is determined in accordance with the law regulations and policies and regulations, combining with the county (city) party committees, the township annual assessment indicators, the responsibility objectives and national statistical offices of the statistical indicators, such as the historical level, industry level. Combination of qualitative evaluation method and quantitative method for evaluating in practice when specific score.
(4) Construction comprehensive evaluation model of economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres and empirical applications. The subject evaluates object in accordance with the evaluation criteria and determines the corresponding scores with qualitative or quantitative evaluation method at all levels and all kinds of evaluation of the index rating. Weighted scoring of each index is determined by score multiplied by the corresponding weight of the index. The sum of weighted score for each indicator obtains the total score of comprehensive evaluation for economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres. It can be transformed into a composite score percentile system when comprehensive evaluation. According to the score, it is divided into four grades:excellent, good, fair, and poor. In this paper, the comprehensive evaluation model is application with actual information on economic responsibility audit of two townnship leading cadres. The test showed that the comprehensive evaluation model has strong applicability.
(5) The role that economic responsibility audit of the township leading cadres can play depends on the application of the audit results. The audit results conversion and use is to promote rectification from the mechanisms and the institutional. The ultimate goal of economic responsibility audit is the application of audit results. Evaluation is only a tool, the key to full and effective application of audit results of the evaluation is the settled point and the ultimate goal of the economic responsibility audit. To this end, we should fully understand the role of economic responsibility audit of the leading cadres, improve audit quality, written report of audit reports and audit results; further improve the linkage of accountability mechanisms, take full advantage of all aspects of information, improv collaboration capabilities; perfect party and government leading cadres economic responsibility audit results announcement system; build relief system to protect the object of the audited unit sector, while reducing audit risk.
4The main innovation
(1) Establishing evaluation indexes of economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres. According to the practical needs of social development, we expand the content and scope of the economic responsibility audi of township leading cadres. This article designs the evaluation indexes from five content such as "economic management responsibilitiy","economic decision-making","implementation of economic policy responsibilitiy""economic development responsibilitiy "and "honest and upright administration responsibilitiy ". By analysis questionnaires, it identifies20evaluation indexes,which focus on both traditional evaluation and evaluation indicators of sustainable development, to form a new, more complete index system.
(2) Construction comprehensive evaluation model of economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres. According to the expert survey questionnaire, constructs judgment matrix application with AHP, calculats determining the evaluation index weights. Compared with the use of subjective determine the weight (or do not consider each index weight) currently, it is more scientific. At the same time, determining corresponding evaluation criteria of each index, combination qualitative evaluation with quantitative evaluation method, subjective judgment being objectively quantified, comprehensive evaluation model of economic responsibility audit of township leading cadres is constructed.
引文
[1]NP.Hepworth, Oct,1995. The Role of Performance Audit. Public Money & Management, Vol.15, Iss.4:P39-42
[2]C Pollitt, Jan, Performance Audit in Western Europe:Trends and Choices. Critical Perspectives on Accounting,2003. Vol.14, Iss.1-2:P157-170.
[3]刑俊芳等.最新国外效益审计[M].北京：中国时代经济出版社.2004.上卷P3-4
[4]张继勋.国外政府绩效审计及其启示[J].审计研究.2000(1)
[5]彭化彰.国外效益审计的启示与开展中国特色效益审计的探索[J].审计研究.2005(1)
[6]傅京译.介绍两种新增的“E”[J].审计情报.1990(8)
[7]JW Humble,1973:ocial Responsibility Audit:A management tool for survival. Foundation for Business Responsibilities.
[8]Peter Koketal, T vander Wiele, R McKenna, A Brown, Jun,2001. A Corporate Social Responsibility Audit within a Quality Management Framework. Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.31, No.4:285-297.
[9]J Maltby,1995.Environmental Audit: Theory and Practices. Managerial auditing Journal, Vol.10, Iss.8:P 15-26
[10]Dw Taylor, M Sulaiman, M Sheahan,2001. Auditing of environmental management systems:A legitimacy theory perspective.Mamagerial Auditing Journal, Vol.16, Iss.7:p411-422.
[11]JA Hepler, C Neumann, Apr.,2003.Enhancing compliance at Department of Defense facilities:Comparison of three environmental audit tools. Journal of Environmental Health, Vol.65, Iss.8:P17
[12]Ahlenius,I. Performance Audit,Evaluations and Supreme Audit Institutions[J].International Journal of Government Auditing,2000,27(1):1-2
[13]Andy, Y.N. Pubic Accountability and Performance Auditing Concepts[J]. International Journal of Auditing,2002,6(1):109-118
[14]Guthrie,J.The Contested National performance Auditing in Australia[J].The International Journal of Pubic Sector Management,1989,3(2):180-201
[15]Harris, J. The Disourse of Governmental Accounting and Auditing[J]. Pubic Budgeting & Finace,2005,17(8):155-179
[16]INCOSAI. General Statement of XII Incosai on Performance Audit[J].Audit of Pubic Enterprise & Audit Quality,1986
[17]Pollit, C.,Girre,X.& Lonsdate, J. Performance or Compliance?-Performance Audit and Public Mangement in Five Countries[J].Oxford University Press,1999,8(24):10-32
[18]Stewart, J.D. The Role of Information in Public Accountabty [J]. Public Sector Accounting,1984
[19]Verschoor, C. Performance Auditing:A Measurement Approach[J]. Internal Auditing,2003,18(2):47
[20]Yamamoto,K.&Masayuki,W.Performance Auditing in the Central Government of Japan[J]. Financial Accountability & Management,1989,5(4):109-118
[21]Yamamoto,K.Theory and Methods of Performance Audit(1)[J].The Accounting and Auditing,1974,1(35):23-27
[22]竹德操、吴云飞.经济效益审计学[M].成都：西南财经大学出版社.1991.P67-70
[23]李凤鸣.会计制度设计[M].北京：北京大学出版社.2002.P18-21
[24]管锦康.中国会计研究文献摘编(1979—1999)[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社.2002.P131
[25]杨时展.会计信息系统说三评—决策论和受托责任论的论争[J].财会通讯1992(6)
[26]孟德斯鸠著,张雁深译.论法的精神(上)[M].北京：商务印书馆.1959.184-185
[27](美)埃德加·博博登海默Bodemheimer.E.著.邓正来、姬敬武译.法理学—法哲学及其方法[M].北京：华夏出版社.1987.P347
[28]王寿林.社会主义国家权力制约论[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社.1993.P8-9
[29]王光远.管理审计理论[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社.1996.P178
[30]蔡春.受托经济责任—现代会计、审计之魂[J].会计之友.2000(10)
[31]李季秀.略论委托代理与经济责任审计[J].经济研究.2001(6)
[32]董延安.受托责任·审计·权力控制——审计对权力进行控制的动因分析[J].当代财经.2007(5)
[33]蔡春、陈晓媛.关于经济责任审计的定位、作用及未来发展之研究[J].审计研究.2007(1)
[34]张立民.审计制度建设的理论依据——从“受托经济责任论”到契约经济学[J].审计研究.2002(3)
[35]杜爱霞.论“契约—责任—博弈”理论框架的构建—经济责任审计开展的理论依据[J].科学咨询(科技管理).2007(1)
[36]刘洋.领导干部经济责任审计对象舞弊行为经济学分析[J].金卡工程·经济与 法.2008(8)
[37]刘颖斐、余玉苗.宪政视角下的党政领导干部经济责任审计[J].审计研究.2007(3)
[38]韩锐.经济责任审计若干法律问题之我见[J].审计研究.2010(2)
[39]李树廷.经济责任审计的回顾与思考[J].中国审计.2009(10)
[40]张以宽.关于经济责任审计的几个问题的理性思考[J].审计研究.2001(4)
[41]陈波.经济责任审计的若干基本理论问题[J].审计研究.2005(5)
[42]袁玉岫、沐云.规范经济责任审计,促进领导干部提高执政能力[J].审计研究.2005(6)
[43]水志仁、严卫华、赵刚.市、县长经济责任审计与财政决算审计相结合的研究[J].审计研究.2002(S1)
[44]林忠华.经济责任审计需研究改进的若干问题[J].审计月刊.2008(3)
[45]李江涛、苗连琦、梁耀辉.经济责任审计运行效果实证研究[J].审计研究.2011(3)
[46]廖洪、王素梅.以问责为基础的国家审计发展研究.审计研究[J].2008(5)
[47]蔡春、李江涛.经济权力审计监控研究—审计理论研究的一个新领域[J].审计与经济研究.2009(5)
[48]俞可平.中国政治发展30年[M].重庆：重庆出版社.2009.P196-203
[49]李军鹏.深化行政管理体制改革若干重大问题解析[M].北京：中共党史出版社.2008
[50]胡锦涛.高举中国特色社会主义伟大旗帜为夺取全面建设小康社会新胜利而奋斗—在中国共产党第十七次全国代表大会上的报告[M].北京：人民出版社.2007
[51]温家宝.认真贯彻党的十七大精神大力推进廉政建设和反腐败工作[J].求是.2008(9)
[52]俞可平.作为一种新政治分析框架的治理和善治理论[J].新视野.2001(5)
[53]崔孟修.经济责任审计对国家审计的丰富和发展[J].审计研究.2007(6)
[54]许百军.寻租理论、政府权力的监督与公共责任视角下的经济责任审计[J].审计研究.2005(4)
[55]蔡春、田秋蓉、刘雷.经济责任审计与审计理论创新[J].审计研究.2011(2)
[56]单晓丽.浅议乡镇党政领导干部经济责任审计的内容和范围[J].现代农业.2011(3)
[57]湖北省审计学会课题组.我国审计公告制问题研究[J].审计研究.2003(8)
[58]余敬柱.县(区)党政领导经济责任审计之管见[J].审计与理财.2006(6)
[59]黄溶冰、单建宁、时现.绿色经济视角下的党政领导干部经济责任审计[J].审计研究.2010(4)
[60]周曦.基于经济责任的环境审计路径选择—浅析经济责任审计中的环境保护责任审计[J].审计研究.2011(5)
[61]廖洪.论经济责任审计评价指标的作用及设置原则[J].审计研究.2001(3)
[62]高凤莲、胡永武.区域领导干部经济责任审计的考核评价内容[J].当代审计.2002(2)
[63]费军、张雄波、朱扣成.模糊层次分析法在军队领导干部经济责任审计评价中的运用[J].军事经济研究.2004(9)
[64]周云平.市县党政领导干部经济责任审计方法探讨[J].审计研究.2005(3)
[65]河南省经济责任审计评价科学化课题组.经济责任审计评价科学化研究[J].审计研究.2005(5)
[66]曹成.构建地方党政领导经济责任审计评价指标体系发挥“三责联审”成效[J].审计月刊.2009(10)
[67]梁雪铖.经济责任同步审计评价问题探析[J].审计研究.2011(3)
[68]陈琛凝.党政领导干部经济责任审计评价指标探析[J].财会通讯.2011(4上)
[69]蔡春.审计理论结构研究[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社.2001.P22-47
[70]徐政旦、谢荣等.审计研究前沿[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社.2002.P48-59
[71]文硕.世界审计史(修订版)[M].北京：企业管理出版社.1996.P14-15
[72]David Flint,Philosophy and Principles of Auditing:An Introduction, Macmillan Education Ltd,1988:chapter 1
[73]杨时展.国家审计的本质[J].当代审计.1982(2)
[74]朱登云.审计结果公告制度的法律研究[J].审计研究.2004(2)
[75]高存弟、史维.政府审计的发展趋势研究[J].审计研究.2003(3)
[76]张维迎.博弈论与信息经济学[M].上海：上海人民出版社.2004.P235-237
[77]张春霖.存在道德风险的委托关系：理论分析及其应用中的问题[J].经济研究.1995(8)
[78]张维迎.公有制经济中的委托人——代理人关系：理论分析和政策含义[J].经济研究.1995(4)
[79][美]拉斯缪森(Rasmusen. E.).博弈论与信息：博弈论概论(第2版)[M].姚洋校.王晖、白金辉、吴任晨译.北京：北京大学出版社.2003.P3-29
[80][美]保罗·萨缪尔森(Paul A.Samuelson)、威廉·诺德豪斯(William D.Nordhaus)著.萧琛等译.经济学(第十六版).北京：华夏出版社.1999.P160-163
[81]李喜童.善治是实现政府治理的终极目标[J].发展.2004(8)
[82]杨志勇等.公共经济学[M].北京：清华大学出版社.2005.P67-84
[83]温美琴、胡贵安.论我国政府审计的环境变迁与职责重构[J].审计研究.2005(6)
[84]张立民、聂新宇.构建和谐社会下的政府审计公告制度——基于政府审计信息产权视角的分析[J].审计研究.2003(8)
[85]Anne Marie Goetz and Rob Jenkins. Reinventing accountability. Making democracy work for human development New York Palgrave Macmilian,2005. P135.
[86]Daniel Kaufnann, Aart Kraay, Massimo Mastruzzi Governance matters IV: governance indicators for 1996-2004.The World Bank, June 2005.130-131.
[87]葛笑天.政府职能转变中的政府审计变革初探[J].审计研究.2005(1)
[88]中华人民共和国国家统计局.中国统计年鉴(2011)[M].北京：中国统计出版社.2011.P3
[89]李千予.经济责任审计概念的探讨[J].审计研究.1987(6)
[90]冯来强.经济责任审计与绩效审计比较研究[J].吉首大学学报(社会科学版).2007(5)
[91]吴瑞勤、孟祥霞.基于经济责任审计的政府问责制体系的构建[J].财会研究.2009(7)
[92]徐荣华、郑丽霞、吴宗良.以责任为重心开展经济责任审计[J].财会研究.2011(8)
[93]R.Morimoto, J Ash, C Hope, Dec,2005. Corporate Social Responsibility Audit: From Theory to Practice, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.62, No.4:315-325
[94]John C.Burton,May,1968.Management Auditing.The Journal of Accountancy:P 44.
[95]中华人民共和国审计署法制司编著.国家审计法规[M].北京：中国时代经济出版社.2006
[96]Herbert. L. Auditing the Performance of Management, Wadsworth, Inc,1979,P47
[97]张维迎、马捷.恶性竞争的产权基础[J].经济研究.1999(6)
[98]刘明.结构性反腐败论纲[D].东北师范大学博士学位论文.2002.P6
[99]胡鞍钢.中国：挑战腐败[M].杭州：浙江人民出版社.2001.P60
[100]蔡芳宏.乡镇政府的制度博弈及其财政效用改善[J].改革.2009(9)
[101]翁晓会、陈晓娣.利益视角下的政绩考核与乡镇政府行为选择[J].河北理工大学学报(社会科学版).2011(1)
[102]周黎安.晋升博弈中政府领导干部的激励与合作[J].经济研究.2004(6)
[103]彭国甫、盛明科、李树丞.应用层次分析法确定政府绩效评价指标权重[J]. 中国软科学.2004(6)
[104]Thomas I Palley. Safety in numbers:A model of managerial herd behaviour [J] Journal of Economics and Orgnization,1995,25:443-450
[105]尚虎平.绩效晋升下我国地方政府非绩效行为诱因：一个博弈论的解释[J].财经研究.2007(12)
[106]庞继英、耿金岭、李春友.公益性项目效益审计评价模型的构建与应用研究[J].审计研究.2010(5)
[107]于保和.经济责任审计研究[D].东北财经大学博士学位论文.2003.P5
[108]任继荣.乡镇领导干部经济责任审计创新[J].理财.2011(7)
[109]柏继民.坚持经济责任审计促进党风廉政建设[J].审计研究.2000(5)
[110]柴今.经济责任审计：给你一本明白账[J].资本市场杂志.2002(9)
[111]张宣波.党政领导干部经济责任审计内容的探讨[J].中国审计.2005(22))
[112]陈正兴.关于市、县长经济责任审计若干问题的思考[J].审计研究.2003(6)
[113]李季泽.强化“三农”审计为推进农业现代化和社会主义新农村建设服务[J].审计研究.2011(5)
[114]周云平、陈通.乡镇党政主要负责人经济责任审计的内容和方法[J].审计研究.2006(2)
[115石金玲.乡镇党政领导干部经济责任界定评价的思考[J].安阳工学院学报.2007(2)
[116]张建国、沈潞嵘.事业单位党政领导干部经济责任审计评价指标[J].湖北审计.2001(12)
[117]马荣秀、魏长华.建立乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价指标体系的思考[J].中国审计信息与方法.2002(2)
[118]李诗银.乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价指标体系[J].中国审计.2003(7)
[119]杨广益.浅谈对乡镇领导经济责任审计评价的把握[J].现代审计与经济.2008(2)
[120]王新秀.构建乡镇党政正职经济责任审计评价指标体系的思考[J].产业与科技论坛.2009(3)
[121]张崇荣.乡镇长经济责任审计评价指标体系研究—以浙江诸暨乡镇调研为例[M].浙江大学硕士学位论文.2007.P51-53
[122]姚晓红等.建立健全乡党政领导干部经济责任审计评价指标体系的浅析[J].重庆市审计科研课题成果汇编(综合)(2009-2010).P113-123.
[123]课题组.关于建立县级以下领导干部经济责任审计评价指标体系的研究[J].宁波经济丛刊.2004(4)
[124]马维国.领导干部经济责任审计综合评价指标体系初探[J].工业审计与会计.2009(5)
[125]孟枫平.乡镇领导干部经济责任审计评价指标体系的研究[J].中国乡镇企业会计.2003(4)
[126]吴亚生.乡镇领导干部经济责任审计的评价指标浅议[J].财经界(学术版).2010(1)
[127]T.L.Saaty. The Analytic Hierarchy Process [M]. New York, McGraw-Hill Inc, 1980
[128]Partovi F Y. Determining what to benchmark:an analytic hierarchy process approach [J]. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Mgmt,1994,14. (6):25-39
[129]层次分析法[EB/OL]www.http://webdataanalysis.net/data-analysis-method/ahp/ 2012-2-27
[130]运筹学教材编写组.运筹学(第3版)[M].北京：清华大学出版社.2005.P455
[131]刘爱东、钱学明.经济责任审计问卷调查的统计分析及启示[J].山东财政学院学报(双月刊).2010(2)
[132]吴国萍.谈谈经济责任审计中的审计评价[J].当代审计.2000(5)
[133]李和平.党政领导干部经济责任审计评价指标体系[J].河北审计.2001(7)
[134]周云平.乡镇党政“一把手”经济责任审计内容和方法[J].山东审计.2003(1)
[135]李庆红.基于AHP模型经济责任审计评价体系的构建[J].财政监督.2010(5)
[136]吴玲萍.评价指标导向的经济责任审计模式构建研究[J].会计之友.2011(2)
[137]周勇.我国政府绩效审计评价标准的构建[J].经济纵横.2008(1)
[138]樊晶玉、潘颖、孙绪静.对区县级党政领导干部经济责任审计评价标准的研究[J].商业经济.2008(6)
[139]赵志新.浅议经济责任审计评价指标标准设计方法[J].中国内部审计.2010(6)
[140]马丽莹、王景涛.领导干部任期经济责任评价内容与标准的思考[J].会计之友.2006(7中)
[141]王奇杰.经济责任审计评价探讨[J].商场现代化.2007(4中)
[142]刘湘耀.基层经济责任审计评价标准的获取途径[J].审计月刊.2008(8)
[143]王光庆.浅析干部德的考核评价标准和办法[N].中国组织人事报.2011年11月21日
[144]陈洪山、张秋丽.经济责任审计评价内容和标准初探[J].当代审计.2001(5)
[145]周惠珍.投资项目评估(3版[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社.2005.P204-225,405-415
[146]环境效益[EB/OL]www.http://u.china.com/sudi/open.php.2012-3-3.
[147]胡春元.审计风险研究[M].大连：东北财经大学出版社.1997.P32
[148]中国社会科学院语言研究室词典编辑室.现代汉语词典.北京：商务图书馆.1997.P1623
[149]中国质量管理协会.全面质量管理基础知识[M].北京：科学普及出版社.1987.P37
[150]胡铭.质量管理学[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社.2004.P47
[151]RL Watts, JL Zimmerman, Oct.,1983. Agency problems, auditing, and the theory of the firm:Some evidence. Journal of Law & Economics:P613-643.
[152]徐雪林、郭长水.经济责任审计对象研究[J].审计研究.2005(4)
[153]贾震、王新华.经济责任审计监控模型研究[J].审计研究.2001(6)
[154]于保和、张相洲.经济责任审计中的内部控制评价[J].审计研究.2002(3)
[155]秦小丽、常丽娟.经济责任审计风险及其防范刍议[J].审计研究.2005(6)
[156]王会金、尹平.论国家审计风险的成因及控制策略[J].审计研究.2000(2)
[157]谭劲松.试论国家审计风险[J].审计研究.1999(6)
[]58]杨锦水、翁俊涵.试论国家审计风险的成因与控制措施[J].审计月刊.2008(2)
[159]秦荣生.审计风险探源：信息不对称[J].审计研究.2005(5)
[160]干胜道、王磊.基于信息不对称的政府审计风险的控制研究[J].审计研究.2006(1)
[161]汪国平.论审计结果公告制度下的国家审计风险控制[J].审计月刊.2005(11)
[162]常人兵.经济责任审计的质量、风险与控制[J].四川会计.2003(10)
[163]丁梅.经济责任审计风险的成因及防范[J].杭州商学院学报.2004(3)
[164]刘炎.经济责任审计的风险及其防范[J].审计与经济研究.2000(6)
[165]Alvin A. Arens, James K. Loebbecke. Auditing-An Intergrated Approch. Prentice-Hall, Inc.,1992:P252.
[166]B. E. Cushing and J. K. Loebbecke, analytical Approaches to Audit Risk:Survey and Analysis, Auditing:A Journal of Practice and Theory,1983,PP.25-41
[167]Roger Adams, Audit Risk, Current Issues in Auditing, Second Edition, Edited by Michel Shere & Sturat Turley, P. CP,1992
[168]W. Alderman and R. H. Tabor, The Case for Driven Audits, Journal of Accountancy, Marc,1989, PP.55-61.
[169]Anthony Steele, Audit Risk and Audit Evidence:The Bayesian Approach to Statisitical Auditing, Academic Press Limited,1992, London.
[170]张龙平.试论我国审计质量控制标准的建设[J].注册会计师通讯.1994(8)
[171]刘英来.关于审计质量控制的思考[J].审计研究.2003(4)
[172]王勤学、吴瑞勤.经济责任审计在政府问责制建设中的作用[J].财会通讯·综合.2010(4下)
[173]陈博.浅议问责与经济责任审计的关系[J].中国审计.2008(23)
[174]刘凤侠、胡春凤.不要让“怕”字挡住路子[J].陕西审计.2002(1)
[175]徐春林.注重对领导干部经济责任审计结果的运用[J].江南论坛.2004(5)
[176]阮滢.党政领导干部经济责任审计问责一体化模式构建初探[J].财会通讯·综合.2011(4上)
[177]王艳生、刘亚秀.完善党政领导干部经济责任审计对策建议[J].经济师.2009(12)
[178]符强.领导干部经济责任审计结果运用中的几个问题[J].中国审计信息与方法.2001(9)
[179]Black's Law dictionary. Bryan Garner, Black's Law dictionary (8th), West Publishing Co.2004
[180]郑颖.经济责任审计在政府问责制建设中的作用研究[J].审计研究.2009(3)
[181]柏继民.深入贯彻两个规定,推动经济责任审计进一步发展[J].山东审理工计.2000(7)
[182]秦荣生.深化政府审计监督完善政府治理机制[J].审计研究.2007(1)
[183]Herbert. L.,Auditing the Performance of Management, Wadsworth, Inc.,1979,P47
[184]刑俊芳.审计学辞典[M].北京：人民出版社.1991.P374
[185]黄学忠.经济信息与管理[M].北京：人民出版社.1985.P59-68
[186]A Statement of Basic Auditing Concepts, American Accounting Association, 1973, P5-6.
[187]侯德坤.审计学(2版)[M].北京：中国农业出版社.1997.P138
[188]David N. RicChiute, D. N, Auditing Concepts and Standands, South-Western Publishing Co.,1982,P28-29
[189]刘更新.经济责任审计的运行机制及其治理效率研究[D].西南财经大学博士学位论文.2010.P29
[190](美)阿尔文·A·艾伦斯(Alvin A·Arens)、兰德尔·J.埃尔德(Randal J. Elder)、马克·S.比兹利(Mark S.Beasley)著.王英姿、杜英译.审计学[M].上海：上海财经大学出版.2005.P279
[191]马学斌.国家审计制约与监督权力运行—理论与实证[D].西南财经大学博士学位论文.2007.P60-65
[192]尹平.现行国家审计体制的利弊权衡与改革抉择[J].审计研究.2001(4)
[193]石爱中.现行体制下国家审计法治谠论[J].审计研究.2004(1)
[194]宋涛.中国官员问责发展实证研究[J].中国行政管理.2008(1)
[195]李金华.国家审计是国家治理的工具[J].财经.2004(24)
[196]袁新文.经济责任审计必须正确分清的几个界限[J].审计研究.2001(5)
[197]杜燕雯.经济责任审计“关口前移”动因分析[J].财会研究.2011(8)
[198]张大敏.构建我国审计结果公告制度的探讨[J].审计月刊.2004(5)
[199]王秀明、彭新林.经济责任审计相关法律问题的几点思考[J].审计研究.2006(6)
[200]毛寿龙.责任政府的理论及其政策意义[J].行政论坛.2007(2)
[201]毛寿龙.引咎辞职、问责制与治道变革[J].浙江学刊.2005(2)
[202]David Gwilliam, A Survey of Auditing Research Published in Association with The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales,1987
[203]李录忠.刍议经济责任审计两个报告的区别[J].现代审计与经济.2006(3)
[204]王斌.陕西省经济责任审计的回顾与思考[J].现代审计与经济.2009(4)
[205]张勇.经济责任导向审计模式研究[D].西南财经大学博士学位论文.2009.P125
[206]谢荣.论审计风险的产生原因、模式演变和控制措施[J].审计研究.2003(4)
[207]王奇杰.经济责任审计研究：文献综述与展望[J].财会通讯·综合(下).2009(10)
[208]张勇.经济责任审计理论研究述评——基于国内1987至2007年研究的分析[J].审计研究.2009(3)