Information needs for managing fixed public sector assets: an exploratory analysis in South-Eastern Europe

Abstract

Purpose This article presents an exploratory analysis of perceived information needs for managing fixed public sector assets in South-Eastern Europe (SEE). Design/methodology/approach The analysis was carried out from a user needs perspective. A questionnaire was administered to government officials in SEE. Respondents were queried about what categories of information they need to make or to recommend five typical decisions concerning fixed public sector assets. Respondents also provided assessments on current availability and quality of information on fixed public sector assets, cost-benefit considerations regarding data collection and suitability of information for routine collection and updating. Findings The findings of this study indicate that the information collected for financial reporting purposes is recognized as insufficient to support decision-making on fixed public sector assets. However, perceived information needs by respondents are still rather basic. The need for more “sophisticated” and “strategic” information is found to be rather low, more so when the cost of collecting and processing such information is considered. Practical implications The findings of this study raise concerns about the persistently insufficient attention paid to the potential benefits that well-compiled and appropriately used asset registries could produce. The findings of this study might be useful to governments initiating the identification and measurement of their fixed assets, establishing fixed asset registries and instituting relevant regulation. Originality/value This study adds to the scant literature on the management of fixed public sector assets. It provides evidence on the perceived information needs of public sector officials, and it contributes to the ongoing debate on what good public sector asset management is and how it should be pursued.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 4 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.