Third: Planning and programming budget (planning and 
programming approach):
This approach appeared as a result of the need to link government 
programs to the Public plan of the state. The program and performance 
approach does not require that the programs be based on planning as 
much as it is concerned with converting the activities of government 
agencies into programs. As for the planning and programming budget, 
it aims to link between appropriations and the achievement of the 
planned goals, and so the planning function is given priority over both 
the functions of controlling spending or managing government activity 
through programs. Thus, it combines the three dimensions of the 
budget, which are planning, implementation, and control, giving 
priority to planning. Therefore, it can be considered a development of 
the program and performance approach with a focus on long-term 
planning in addition to short-term planning.
This approach originated in the Ministry of Defense in the United 
States of America in 1961 and then spread to all ministries in 1966. It 
is considered a means of making decisions that relate to the 
comparison between alternative and competing programs to achieve 
certain goals or to modify these goals. It views government programs 
as mere means aimed at converting public resources or production 
factors into final products that represent the goals to be achieved.
This approach is characterized by the necessity of setting
specifications for the objectives of each program and conducting an analytical study of the results that can be obtained with measuring 
costs and analyzing alternatives to reach the most effective programs. 
This approach depends on systems analysis and economic feasibility 
studies, and is concerned with focusing on goals, alternatives, 
forecasts, and developing plans and their main and sub-programs.
Fourth: Budget on the basis of zero (zero approach):
As a result of the fact that the planning and programming budget 
approach has faced some difficulties during implementation related to 
setting priority criteria among new programs and its focus on studying 
new programs without evaluating the currently implemented 
programs, a new trend has emerged in preparing the budget, which is 
the zero-based budget system, as it focuses on how to achieve goals 
and provide means to assess the effects of priority levels.
This approach was initially used in the US Department of Agriculture
(USDA) in 1962, and in 1971 President Carter ordered it to be applied 
in Georgia and then in the federal government in 1977.
According to the zero-based budget system, the draft budget is 
prepared on the basis of evaluation of all new and existing programs, 
and this requires a full analysis of the decision groups for each 
government activity. The decision groups contain data and information 
that enable the administration to evaluate the efficiency of activities 
and compare them with the proposed alternative programs. The 
preparation goes through stages that begin with identifying alternatives 
and then excluding alternatives in the light of the cost-benefit analysis 
for each program so that there is justification for the amounts required 
for each program.
It is clear that logically, the concept is not the starting from zero
without any regard for the past, as planning usually does not arise from 
a vacuum, and the expression of the zero basis is something of 
exaggeration, as it is practically not possible to start from zero if the 
unit has already had an activity within the framework of a plan and 
within the framework of a set of decisions, and the procedures for 
preparing this budget includes the necessity of determining the 
decision units and arranging them in groups (decision packages) on a 
differential basis.
Although the planning and programming budget is concerned with the 
overall activity, the zero-based budget is concerned with the partial 
activity, that is, the unit's activity. It is also concerned with the shortterm time dimension, starting from the bottom to the top. The degree 
of priority between the programs is determined on the basis of a 
detailed comparison of all branches of activity before the allocation of
resources, which leads to an increase in the effectiveness of the 
allocation.