Australian Journal of Public Administration最新文献_第4页

The Facilitative State and the Symbolic Potency of Mutual Obligation 促进型国家与相互义务的象征效力

IF 2.2 4区管理学 Q1 Social Sciences

Australian Journal of Public Administration

Pub Date : 2024-02-26 DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8500.2001.tb00002.x

Michael Muetzelfeldt

This paper discusses ambiguities of mutual obligation at the levels of: defining the new political middle ground, policies for dealing with non‐compliance, the analytical frames that are used to support it, and discourses of contract. It concludes by locating these ambiguities within the cultural anthropological notion of symbol. As a symbol, mutual obligation has the power to confound its critics — criticism of the notion and its inconsistent policy prescriptions is generally not assessed as right or wrong, but rather is rendered irrelevant.

本文从以下几个层面讨论了相互义务的模糊性：界定新的政治中间立场、处理违约行为的政策、用于支持相互义务的分析框架以及契约论述。最后，本文将这些模糊性归结为文化人类学的符号概念。作为一种象征，共同义务具有迷惑批评者的力量--对这一概念及其不一致的政策规定的批评通常不会被评价为对或错，而是被视为无关紧要。

引用次数: 0

Doing wellbeing policy: A discussion on public policy making for integrative prosperity 制定福祉政策：关于制定公共政策促进综合繁荣的讨论

IF 2.2 4区管理学 Q1 Social Sciences

Australian Journal of Public Administration

Pub Date : 2024-02-25 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12631

James A. Gordon

Focusing on holistic wellbeing rather than solely economic prosperity is becoming ever more popular among policy makers, both in Australia and New Zealand, and elsewhere. And yet, turning a complex set of system-level indicators of wellbeing into actionable policy requires us to rethink how we develop, implement, and evaluate policy. In this article, I review the current trends in wellbeing, including developments in the measurement and tracking of wellbeing, and offer practical steps for integrating actionable wellbeing outcomes into future policymaking processes.

Points for practitioners

Focusing on wellbeing as part of the policy making process is becoming more popular among governments, including in Australia and New Zealand. The New Zealand Government has been doing wellbeing budgets since 2019 while the Australian Government released a new wellbeing framework in 2023.
Wellbeing policy represents an approach to policy making that aims to maximize the general health and happiness of a target population on both subjective and objective measures of wellbeing. This includes both economic and non-economic measures of prosperity and wellbeing.
There are many ways of tracking the wellbeing effect of policy and so choosing the right framework is important for effective wellbeing policy making. This starts with a wellbeing purpose for the policy and a clear and concise definition of wellbeing.
Doing wellbeing policy requires a good understanding of what wellbeing represents and how it is measured. You need relevant and measurable indicators of wellbeing, an evaluation strategy, and the ability to reflect and innovate as part of an iterative policy making process.

无论是在澳大利亚和新西兰，还是在其他国家，关注整体福祉而非单纯的经济繁荣越来越受到政策制定者的青睐。然而，要将一套复杂的系统级福祉指标转化为可操作的政策，我们就必须重新思考如何制定、实施和评估政策。在这篇文章中，我回顾了当前福祉的发展趋势，包括福祉测量和跟踪方面的发展，并提出了将可操作的福祉成果纳入未来政策制定过程的实际步骤。

{"title":"Doing wellbeing policy: A discussion on public policy making for integrative prosperity","authors":"James A. Gordon","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12631","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1467-8500.12631","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Focusing on holistic wellbeing rather than solely economic prosperity is becoming ever more popular among policy makers, both in Australia and New Zealand, and elsewhere. And yet, turning a complex set of system-level indicators of wellbeing into actionable policy requires us to rethink how we develop, implement, and evaluate policy. In this article, I review the current trends in wellbeing, including developments in the measurement and tracking of wellbeing, and offer practical steps for integrating actionable wellbeing outcomes into future policymaking processes.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Points for practitioners</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <div>\u0000 <ul>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Focusing on wellbeing as part of the policy making process is becoming more popular among governments, including in Australia and New Zealand. The New Zealand Government has been doing wellbeing budgets since 2019 while the Australian Government released a new wellbeing framework in 2023.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Wellbeing policy represents an approach to policy making that aims to maximize the general health and happiness of a target population on both subjective and objective measures of wellbeing. This includes both economic and non-economic measures of prosperity and wellbeing.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>There are many ways of tracking the wellbeing effect of policy and so choosing the right framework is important for effective wellbeing policy making. This starts with a wellbeing purpose for the policy and a clear and concise definition of wellbeing.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Doing wellbeing policy requires a good understanding of what wellbeing represents and how it is measured. You need relevant and measurable indicators of wellbeing, an evaluation strategy, and the ability to reflect and innovate as part of an iterative policy making process.</li>\u0000 </ul>\u0000 </div>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8500.12631","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139968350","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Is ‘more’ better? Testing the assumption that larger local governments are more sustainable 更多 "更好吗？检验 "规模更大的地方政府更具可持续性 "的假设

IF 2.2 4区管理学 Q1 Social Sciences

Australian Journal of Public Administration

Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12627

Joseph Drew, Masato Miyazak, Dana McQuestin

It is commonly assumed that bigger local governments will be more financially sustainable. Indeed, public policymakers are often prompted to make boundary change decisions according to idealised structures that they assume will lead to stronger local governments. In addition, many local government regulators urge councillors to work for growth in order to become sustainable. However, the assumption that size is associated with financial sustainability has seldom been put to robust empirical test. In this work, we first explore the theoretical considerations relevant to the supposed association between size and sustainability. Following this, we employ a comprehensive 5‐year panel of data to test the association. The evidence we derive stands in stark contrast to the assumptions of many policy architects. We conclude our work with an enumeration of the surprising implications that our results point to with respect to future public policy prescriptions.Theoretical considerations are ambiguous with respect to the assumption that larger local governments might be more financially sustainable.A regression of a 5‐year panel of data demonstrates that larger local governments are indeed less financially sustainable.Our results suggest the need for a radical re‐appraisal of policies surrounding amalgamation, de‐amalgamation, and which local governments are most at risk of financial failure.

人们普遍认为，地方政府规模越大，财政可持续性就越强。事实上，公共政策的制定者往往会根据理想化的结构做出边界变更的决定，因为他们认为这种结构会使地方政府更加强大。此外，许多地方政府监管机构也敦促议员们努力发展，以实现可持续发展。然而，规模与财政可持续性相关联的假设却很少得到有力的实证检验。在本文中，我们首先探讨了规模与可持续性之间假定关联的相关理论考虑因素。然后，我们采用一个全面的五年期面板数据来检验这种关联。我们得出的证据与许多政策制定者的假设形成了鲜明对比。最后，我们列举了我们的研究结果对未来公共政策制定所产生的令人惊讶的影响。我们的研究结果表明，有必要从根本上重新评估有关合并、取消合并以及哪些地方政府最有可能面临财政破产风险的政策。

{"title":"Is ‘more’ better? Testing the assumption that larger local governments are more sustainable","authors":"Joseph Drew, Masato Miyazak, Dana McQuestin","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12627","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12627","url":null,"abstract":"It is commonly assumed that bigger local governments will be more financially sustainable. Indeed, public policymakers are often prompted to make boundary change decisions according to idealised structures that they assume will lead to stronger local governments. In addition, many local government regulators urge councillors to work for growth in order to become sustainable. However, the assumption that size is associated with financial sustainability has seldom been put to robust empirical test. In this work, we first explore the theoretical considerations relevant to the supposed association between size and sustainability. Following this, we employ a comprehensive 5‐year panel of data to test the association. The evidence we derive stands in stark contrast to the assumptions of many policy architects. We conclude our work with an enumeration of the surprising implications that our results point to with respect to future public policy prescriptions.\u0000Theoretical considerations are ambiguous with respect to the assumption that larger local governments might be more financially sustainable.\u0000A regression of a 5‐year panel of data demonstrates that larger local governments are indeed less financially sustainable.\u0000Our results suggest the need for a radical re‐appraisal of policies surrounding amalgamation, de‐amalgamation, and which local governments are most at risk of financial failure.\u0000","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139818975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Is ‘more’ better? Testing the assumption that larger local governments are more sustainable 更多 "更好吗？检验 "规模更大的地方政府更具可持续性 "的假设

IF 2.2 4区管理学 Q1 Social Sciences

Australian Journal of Public Administration

Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12627

Joseph Drew, Masato Miyazaki, Dana McQuestin

It is commonly assumed that bigger local governments will be more financially sustainable. Indeed, public policymakers are often prompted to make boundary change decisions according to idealised structures that they assume will lead to stronger local governments. In addition, many local government regulators urge councillors to work for growth in order to become sustainable. However, the assumption that size is associated with financial sustainability has seldom been put to robust empirical test. In this work, we first explore the theoretical considerations relevant to the supposed association between size and sustainability. Following this, we employ a comprehensive 5-year panel of data to test the association. The evidence we derive stands in stark contrast to the assumptions of many policy architects. We conclude our work with an enumeration of the surprising implications that our results point to with respect to future public policy prescriptions.

Points for practitioners

Theoretical considerations are ambiguous with respect to the assumption that larger local governments might be more financially sustainable.
A regression of a 5-year panel of data demonstrates that larger local governments are indeed less financially sustainable.
Our results suggest the need for a radical re-appraisal of policies surrounding amalgamation, de-amalgamation, and which local governments are most at risk of financial failure.

人们普遍认为，地方政府规模越大，财政可持续性就越强。事实上，公共政策的制定者往往会根据理想化的结构做出边界变更的决定，因为他们认为这种结构会使地方政府更加强大。此外，许多地方政府监管机构也敦促议员们努力发展，以实现可持续发展。然而，规模与财政可持续性相关联的假设却很少得到有力的实证检验。在本文中，我们首先探讨了规模与可持续性之间假定关联的相关理论考虑因素。然后，我们采用一个全面的五年期面板数据来检验这种关联。我们得出的证据与许多政策制定者的假设形成了鲜明对比。最后，我们列举了我们的研究结果对未来公共政策制定所产生的令人惊讶的影响。我们的研究结果表明，有必要从根本上重新评估有关合并、取消合并以及哪些地方政府最有可能面临财政破产风险的政策。

{"title":"Is ‘more’ better? Testing the assumption that larger local governments are more sustainable","authors":"Joseph Drew, Masato Miyazaki, Dana McQuestin","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12627","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1467-8500.12627","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <p>It is commonly assumed that bigger local governments will be more financially sustainable. Indeed, public policymakers are often prompted to make boundary change decisions according to idealised structures that they assume will lead to stronger local governments. In addition, many local government regulators urge councillors to work for growth in order to become sustainable. However, the assumption that size is associated with financial sustainability has seldom been put to robust empirical test. In this work, we first explore the theoretical considerations relevant to the supposed association between size and sustainability. Following this, we employ a comprehensive 5-year panel of data to test the association. The evidence we derive stands in stark contrast to the assumptions of many policy architects. We conclude our work with an enumeration of the surprising implications that our results point to with respect to future public policy prescriptions.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Points for practitioners</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <div>\u0000 <ul>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Theoretical considerations are ambiguous with respect to the assumption that larger local governments might be more financially sustainable.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>A regression of a 5-year panel of data demonstrates that larger local governments are indeed <i>less</i> financially sustainable.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Our results suggest the need for a radical re-appraisal of policies surrounding amalgamation, de-amalgamation, and which local governments are most at risk of financial failure.</li>\u0000 </ul>\u0000 </div>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8500.12627","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139878994","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Hybrid governance and welfare standards for broiler chickens raised for human consumption 供人类食用的肉鸡的混合管理和福利标准

IF 2.2 4区管理学 Q1 Social Sciences

Australian Journal of Public Administration

Pub Date : 2024-01-14 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12625

Peter John Chen, S. O’Sullivan, Susan Pyke

This article examines the welfare standards that govern the lives of chickens raised for meat in Australia and the United Kingdom. While ‘meat chickens’ are subject to a wide range of welfare interventions, we focus on the development and implications of the ‘private’ standards which are the most significant determinants of meat chicken welfare in these jurisdictions: the RSPCA Approved Farming Scheme in Australia and the Red Tractor Chicken Assurance Scheme in the United Kingdom. While the jurisdictions appear to have a similar regime that favours private regulation, differences in the origins and governance of these systems can be identified, offering insights into the use of hybrid regulation in areas associated with the welfare of non‐human animals. The similarities and differences in these countries point to the importance of individual relationships, as well as supply chain power in the adoption of private standards as a response to comparatively unstructured community concerns about welfare (Australia) and welfare and food safety (United Kingdom). While hybridity as a form of new public governance can be seen to facilitate innovative and varied responses to state devolution, the article concludes the overarching anthropocentrism of policymakers and the policy sciences explains a closed, incremental, and conservative form of practice in this area. Observations of the wider ‘animal turn’ in the social sciences are recommended to consider future systems of hybrid regulation that are not centred on anthropocentrism and more fully expand hybridity's participatory promise.Hybrid governance can focus on the use of hybrid organisational design and/or hybrid regulatory practice; each has very different characteristics and their respective use is often a function of local conditions and situations.Hybrid standards‐making systems need to be open to public participation in development and implementation (oversight), or risk capture and moral hazard.Public policy is largely predicated on strong anthropocentrism, which can be addressed through the use of critical rather than simple pluralism to expand the number of interests captured in regulatory practices.

本文探讨了澳大利亚和英国管理肉鸡生活的福利标准。虽然 "肉鸡 "受到各种福利干预，但我们重点关注 "私营 "标准的发展和影响，这些标准是这些司法管辖区肉鸡福利的最重要决定因素：澳大利亚的 RSPCA 批准养殖计划和英国的 Red Tractor 鸡肉保证计划。虽然这些司法管辖区似乎都有类似的有利于私人监管的制度，但可以发现这些制度的起源和管理方面存在差异，这为在与非人类动物福利相关的领域使用混合监管提供了启示。这些国家的相似之处和不同之处表明，在采用私营标准以应对相对非结构化的社会对福利（澳大利亚）和福利与食品安全（英国）的关注时，个人关系和供应链的力量非常重要。虽然混合作为一种新的公共治理形式，可以促进对国家权力下放做出创新和多样的回应，但文章得出结论，决策者和政策科学的总体人类中心主义解释了这一领域封闭、渐进和保守的实践形式。建议对社会科学中更广泛的 "动物转向 "进行观察，以考虑未来的混合监管体系，这些体系不应以人类中心主义为中心，而应更充分地扩大混合的参与性承诺。公共政策在很大程度上是以强烈的人类中心主义为前提的，可以通过使用批判性而非简单的多元化来解决这一问题，以扩大监管实践中利益的数量。

{"title":"Hybrid governance and welfare standards for broiler chickens raised for human consumption","authors":"Peter John Chen, S. O’Sullivan, Susan Pyke","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12625","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12625","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the welfare standards that govern the lives of chickens raised for meat in Australia and the United Kingdom. While ‘meat chickens’ are subject to a wide range of welfare interventions, we focus on the development and implications of the ‘private’ standards which are the most significant determinants of meat chicken welfare in these jurisdictions: the RSPCA Approved Farming Scheme in Australia and the Red Tractor Chicken Assurance Scheme in the United Kingdom. While the jurisdictions appear to have a similar regime that favours private regulation, differences in the origins and governance of these systems can be identified, offering insights into the use of hybrid regulation in areas associated with the welfare of non‐human animals. The similarities and differences in these countries point to the importance of individual relationships, as well as supply chain power in the adoption of private standards as a response to comparatively unstructured community concerns about welfare (Australia) and welfare and food safety (United Kingdom). While hybridity as a form of new public governance can be seen to facilitate innovative and varied responses to state devolution, the article concludes the overarching anthropocentrism of policymakers and the policy sciences explains a closed, incremental, and conservative form of practice in this area. Observations of the wider ‘animal turn’ in the social sciences are recommended to consider future systems of hybrid regulation that are not centred on anthropocentrism and more fully expand hybridity's participatory promise.\u0000Hybrid governance can focus on the use of hybrid organisational design and/or hybrid regulatory practice; each has very different characteristics and their respective use is often a function of local conditions and situations.\u0000Hybrid standards‐making systems need to be open to public participation in development and implementation (oversight), or risk capture and moral hazard.\u0000Public policy is largely predicated on strong anthropocentrism, which can be addressed through the use of critical rather than simple pluralism to expand the number of interests captured in regulatory practices.\u0000","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139530753","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A ‘fair go’ values framework for public policy 公平竞争 "的公共政策价值观框架

IF 2.2 4区管理学 Q1 Social Sciences

Australian Journal of Public Administration

Pub Date : 2024-01-11 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12624

Cosmo Howard, Pandanus Petter, Juliet Pietsch

There is a growing interest in how policy processes can better incorporate the values of the communities they serve, yet policymakers face numerous challenges when they seek to embed values into policies. This paper builds on existing values research to develop a bespoke policy values framework for Australia, based on the popular notion of a ‘fair go’. While the fair go is often associated with a narrow set of equality and procedural justice values, we show that it has a much wider range of historical and contemporary meanings, which taken together provide a useful starting point for understanding policy values important to Australians. We apply our framework to two policy domains—housing and immigration—to show that it offers an effective heuristic to help policymakers understand key value priorities and conflicts in these policy areas. The paper provides theoretical insights regarding the role of values in policymaking and offers a practical tool for use when designing, implementing, and evaluating policies.

Points for practitioners

Community values should inform public policy decision-making in a democracy. However, incorporating values into policy is difficult because of the wide range of different values to consider, the need to manage tensions and conflicts between values, and the time pressures often faced by policymakers.
The popular and enduring notion of the ‘fair go’ embodies multiple value positions, which cover a range of different values that matter to Australians, making it a good basis for an Australian policy values framework.
Our fair go values framework is designed to serve as a heuristic for policymakers when designing and evaluating public policies. It is not intended as a comprehensive guide to value debates in all policy areas, but offers a starting point for quickly appreciating the key value priorities and conflicts in relation to a policy issue. Policymakers should wherever possible follow up with detailed research to understand the complex value debates of different policy issue areas.

人们越来越关注政策制定过程中如何更好地融入所服务社区的价值观，然而决策者在寻求将价值观融入政策时却面临着诸多挑战。本文以现有的价值观研究为基础，根据流行的 "公平竞争 "概念，为澳大利亚制定了一个定制的政策价值观框架。虽然 "公平地去 "通常与狭义的平等和程序正义价值观联系在一起，但我们表明，它具有更广泛的历史和当代含义，这些含义合在一起为理解对澳大利亚人很重要的政策价值观提供了一个有用的出发点。我们将我们的框架应用于两个政策领域--住房和移民--表明它提供了一个有效的启发式方法，帮助政策制定者理解这些政策领域的关键价值优先事项和冲突。本文就价值观在决策中的作用提出了理论见解，并为设计、实施和评估政策提供了实用工具。然而，将价值观纳入政策是很困难的，因为需要考虑的不同价值观范围广泛，需要处理价值观之间的紧张和冲突，以及政策制定者经常面临的时间压力。"公平地去 "这一流行且经久不衰的概念体现了多种价值立场，涵盖了对澳大利亚人至关重要的一系列不同价值观，使其成为澳大利亚政策价值观框架的良好基础。我们的 "公平去做 "价值观框架旨在为政策制定者在设计和评估公共政策时提供启发。它并不打算作为所有政策领域价值辩论的综合指南，而是为快速理解与政策问题相关的关键价值优先事项和冲突提供了一个起点。政策制定者应尽可能开展后续详细研究，以了解不同政策问题领域的复杂价值争论。

{"title":"A ‘fair go’ values framework for public policy","authors":"Cosmo Howard, Pandanus Petter, Juliet Pietsch","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12624","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1467-8500.12624","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <p>There is a growing interest in how policy processes can better incorporate the values of the communities they serve, yet policymakers face numerous challenges when they seek to embed values into policies. This paper builds on existing values research to develop a bespoke policy values framework for Australia, based on the popular notion of a ‘fair go’. While the fair go is often associated with a narrow set of equality and procedural justice values, we show that it has a much wider range of historical and contemporary meanings, which taken together provide a useful starting point for understanding policy values important to Australians. We apply our framework to two policy domains—housing and immigration—to show that it offers an effective heuristic to help policymakers understand key value priorities and conflicts in these policy areas. The paper provides theoretical insights regarding the role of values in policymaking and offers a practical tool for use when designing, implementing, and evaluating policies.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Points for practitioners</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <div>\u0000 <ul>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Community values should inform public policy decision-making in a democracy. However, incorporating values into policy is difficult because of the wide range of different values to consider, the need to manage tensions and conflicts between values, and the time pressures often faced by policymakers.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>The popular and enduring notion of the ‘fair go’ embodies multiple value positions, which cover a range of different values that matter to Australians, making it a good basis for an Australian policy values framework.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Our fair go values framework is designed to serve as a heuristic for policymakers when designing and evaluating public policies. It is not intended as a comprehensive guide to value debates in all policy areas, but offers a starting point for quickly appreciating the key value priorities and conflicts in relation to a policy issue. Policymakers should wherever possible follow up with detailed research to understand the complex value debates of different policy issue areas.</li>\u0000 </ul>\u0000 </div>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8500.12624","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139533424","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Hybrid organisational form as a response to institutional complexity: The case of local municipally owned corporations in Lahore 混合组织形式作为对机构复杂性的回应：拉合尔地方市政公司案例

IF 2.2 4区管理学 Q1 Social Sciences

Australian Journal of Public Administration

Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12622

Madiha Rehman Farooqi, Shabana Naveed, Shajara Ul-Durar, Marco De Sisto

This paper explores hybrid organisational forms that have emerged in response to institutional complexity. For this purpose, the paper studies organisational practices to explore hybrid characteristics in municipally owned corporations (MOCs) and differentiate between distinct manifestations of hybridity. Using a case study research design, three MOCs are selected as units of analysis, and 30 semi-structured interviews are conducted to explain why and how organisations emerge as hybrid organisations through the adoption of multiple institutional prescriptions that compete with their existing logic. The findings of the study reveal a practical approach to managing complexity where organisations tend to form different hybrids rather than simply accepting or rejecting institutional pressures. The study offers insights into the outcomes within organisational milieus as they navigate and assimilate these competing pressures, underscoring that the resultant ramifications may not invariably align with initial expectations.

本文探讨了为应对机构复杂性而出现的混合组织形式。为此，本文研究了组织实践，以探讨市属公司（MOCs）的混合特征，并区分混合的不同表现形式。本文采用案例研究设计，选取了三家市属公司作为分析单位，并进行了 30 次半结构式访谈，以解释组织为何以及如何通过采用与其现有逻辑相竞争的多种制度规定来形成混合组织。研究结果揭示了一种管理复杂性的实用方法，即组织倾向于形成不同的混合体，而不是简单地接受或拒绝制度压力。这项研究深入探讨了组织在驾驭和吸收这些相互竞争的压力时所产生的结果，强调了由此产生的后果可能并不总是与最初的预期一致。

引用次数: 0

How Green Banks can create multiple types of value in the transition to net zero emissions 绿色银行如何在向净零排放过渡的过程中创造多种价值

IF 2.2 4区管理学 Q1 Social Sciences

Australian Journal of Public Administration

Pub Date : 2023-12-26 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12623

Michelle Lyons, Lee Victoria White

Current levels of investment are insufficient to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement, and private sector funding shortfalls are acute. Despite this, little research has been undertaken into Green Banks, a new form of institution which mixes public and private institutional logics to mobilise additional private investment in the net zero transition. This paper examines how hybridity manifests in Green Banks and the ways these institutions create value through their investments. We adopt a mixed method, case study approach, combining primary document study with interviews, to elicit information on different forms of hybrid governance and value creation in four Green Banks (located in Australia, New Zealand, and the United States). We find some commonalities in how hybridity manifests between cases (e.g. combining public knowledge sharing logics with private investment logics), but also significant differences (e.g. in investment focus), as policymakers adapt organisational governance to suit jurisdictional circumstances. Green Banks are perceived to create value beyond their core financial roles, including knowledge spillovers, social equity benefits, and enhanced energy security. Current evaluation approaches focus on financial metrics and often exclude these broader areas of value creation. Development of additional value capture metrics could make Green Bank contributions more visible.

目前的投资水平不足以实现《巴黎协定》的目标，私营部门的资金短缺问题十分严重。尽管如此，有关绿色银行的研究却少之又少。绿色银行是一种新的机构形式，它混合了公共和私营机构的逻辑，以动员更多的私人投资参与净零过渡。本文探讨了混合性在绿色银行中的表现形式，以及这些机构通过投资创造价值的方式。我们采用混合方法、案例研究法，将主要文献研究与访谈相结合，以获取有关四家绿色银行（分别位于澳大利亚、新西兰和美国）不同形式的混合治理和价值创造的信息。我们发现，不同案例之间的混合表现形式存在一些共性（如将公共知识共享逻辑与私人投资逻辑相结合），但也存在显著差异（如投资重点），因为政策制定者会根据辖区情况调整组织治理。人们认为绿色银行创造的价值超出了其核心财务作用，包括知识溢出效应、社会公平效益和增强能源安全。目前的评估方法侧重于财务指标，往往排除了这些更广泛的价值创造领域。制定额外的价值获取指标可使绿色银行的贡献更加明显。

{"title":"How Green Banks can create multiple types of value in the transition to net zero emissions","authors":"Michelle Lyons, Lee Victoria White","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12623","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12623","url":null,"abstract":"Current levels of investment are insufficient to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement, and private sector funding shortfalls are acute. Despite this, little research has been undertaken into Green Banks, a new form of institution which mixes public and private institutional logics to mobilise additional private investment in the net zero transition. This paper examines how hybridity manifests in Green Banks and the ways these institutions create value through their investments. We adopt a mixed method, case study approach, combining primary document study with interviews, to elicit information on different forms of hybrid governance and value creation in four Green Banks (located in Australia, New Zealand, and the United States). We find some commonalities in how hybridity manifests between cases (e.g. combining public knowledge sharing logics with private investment logics), but also significant differences (e.g. in investment focus), as policymakers adapt organisational governance to suit jurisdictional circumstances. Green Banks are perceived to create value beyond their core financial roles, including knowledge spillovers, social equity benefits, and enhanced energy security. Current evaluation approaches focus on financial metrics and often exclude these broader areas of value creation. Development of additional value capture metrics could make Green Bank contributions more visible.","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139064459","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Is there a role for hybrid service provision in place-based initiatives within the human services sector? Findings from an Australian exploratory study 在人类服务部门以地方为基础的倡议中，混合服务的提供是否发挥作用？一项澳大利亚探索性研究的结果

IF 2.2 4区管理学 Q1 Social Sciences

Australian Journal of Public Administration

Pub Date : 2023-12-19 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12621

Kerryn Drysdale, Shona Bates, Alison Ritter, Ciara Smyth, Evelyne de Leeuw, Ilan Katz

The value of place-based initiatives in the design and delivery of human services has long been recognised, but the need for hybrid service delivery to clients—that is any combination of online and in-person modalities—has become more apparent in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. At face value, there may be a perceived contradiction between the reliance on geographical place in place-based initiatives and online service delivery. Yet, it is inevitable that human services will increasingly be delivered in a hybrid form—even in the context of place-based initiatives. This exploratory study included a modified Delphi method and deliberative panels with policymakers, service providers, and academics with experience and/or knowledge of hybrid place-based initiatives. A central finding was the lack of respondents’ shared understanding and ability to link the three central intersecting ideas being examined in this research: ‘hybrid’ and ‘place-based’ and ‘human services’. The principles underpinning place-based initiatives need to be retained when incorporating online service delivery within place-based initiatives. This reflects the need to develop a shared lexicon on hybrid place-based initiatives and more creative understandings and interpretations of the relationship between people and place.

在设计和提供人类服务的过程中，以地点为基础的倡议的价值早已得到认可，但在 COVID-19 大流行之后，向客户提供混合服务（即在线和面对面模式的任何组合）的需求变得更加明显。从表面上看，以地方为基础的举措中对地理位置的依赖与在线服务的提供之间可能存在矛盾。然而，人类服务将越来越多地以混合形式提供--即使是在以地方为基础的计划中，这也是不可避免的。这项探索性研究采用了改良的德尔菲法，并与政策制定者、服务提供者以及对基于地方的混合计划有经验和/或了解的学者组成了讨论小组。一个核心发现是，受访者对本研究中考察的三个相互交叉的核心理念缺乏共同的理解和联系能力：混合"、"基于地方的 "和 "人类服务"。在将在线服务纳入以地方为基础的倡议时，需要保留支持以地方为基础的倡议的原则。这反映出有必要就基于地方的混合倡议以及对人与地方之间关系的更具创造性的理解和诠释形成一个共同的词汇。

{"title":"Is there a role for hybrid service provision in place-based initiatives within the human services sector? Findings from an Australian exploratory study","authors":"Kerryn Drysdale, Shona Bates, Alison Ritter, Ciara Smyth, Evelyne de Leeuw, Ilan Katz","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12621","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12621","url":null,"abstract":"The value of place-based initiatives in the design and delivery of human services has long been recognised, but the need for hybrid service delivery to clients—that is any combination of online and in-person modalities—has become more apparent in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. At face value, there may be a perceived contradiction between the reliance on geographical place in place-based initiatives and online service delivery. Yet, it is inevitable that human services will increasingly be delivered in a hybrid form—even in the context of place-based initiatives. This exploratory study included a modified Delphi method and deliberative panels with policymakers, service providers, and academics with experience and/or knowledge of hybrid place-based initiatives. A central finding was the lack of respondents’ shared understanding and ability to link the three central intersecting ideas being examined in this research: ‘hybrid’ and ‘place-based’ and ‘human services’. The principles underpinning place-based initiatives need to be retained when incorporating online service delivery within place-based initiatives. This reflects the need to develop a shared lexicon on hybrid place-based initiatives and more creative understandings and interpretations of the relationship between people and place.","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138824059","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Public sector innovation for sustainable development goals: A comparative study of innovation types in Thailand and Korea 面向可持续发展目标的公共部门创新:泰国与韩国创新类型的比较研究

IF 2.2 4区管理学 Q1 Social Sciences

Australian Journal of Public Administration

Pub Date : 2023-11-30 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12619

Chutima Suchitwarasan, Emre Cinar, Chris Simms, Jae-Yeon Kim

The aim of this paper is to compare the focus (strategy, capacity, and operation) and locus (internal and external) of innovation types of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)-oriented public sector innovation (PSI) in Thailand and Korea and to contribute to the limited understanding of the role of national context in PSI. Our study analysed 263 SDGs-oriented innovations based on the new typology proposed by Chen et al. The findings identified that the orientation of SDGs-oriented PSI is more external and policy innovation is the most common type in both countries. These distributions, however, vary depending on the contextual differences in administrative and technological contexts, resulting in SDGs-oriented PSI in Korea emphasised on strategy focus, whereas Thailand emphasised capacity focus. This also demonstrates a temporality between strategy, capacity, and operations foci in Korea, but Thailand attempted to fill the capacity gap through SDGs-oriented innovation. Insights from this empirical study can assist public managers in selecting innovation portfolio configurations applicable to their national context.

本文的目的是比较泰国和韩国面向可持续发展目标(sdg)的公共部门创新(PSI)创新类型的重点(战略、能力和运作)和轨迹(内部和外部)，并有助于对国情在PSI中的作用的有限理解。我们的研究基于Chen等人提出的新类型学分析了263项面向可持续发展目标的创新。研究发现，两国以可持续发展目标为导向的PSI的取向更偏向外部，政策创新是最常见的类型。然而，这些分布因行政和技术背景的差异而有所不同，导致以可持续发展目标为导向的PSI在韩国强调战略重点，而泰国强调能力重点。这也表明韩国的战略、能力和运营重点之间存在时间性，但泰国试图通过以可持续发展目标为导向的创新来填补能力差距。从实证研究中获得的见解可以帮助公共管理者选择适合本国国情的创新组合配置。

{"title":"Public sector innovation for sustainable development goals: A comparative study of innovation types in Thailand and Korea","authors":"Chutima Suchitwarasan, Emre Cinar, Chris Simms, Jae-Yeon Kim","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12619","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12619","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to compare the focus (strategy, capacity, and operation) and locus (internal and external) of innovation types of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)-oriented public sector innovation (PSI) in Thailand and Korea and to contribute to the limited understanding of the role of national context in PSI. Our study analysed 263 SDGs-oriented innovations based on the new typology proposed by Chen et al. The findings identified that the orientation of SDGs-oriented PSI is more external and policy innovation is the most common type in both countries. These distributions, however, vary depending on the contextual differences in administrative and technological contexts, resulting in SDGs-oriented PSI in Korea emphasised on strategy focus, whereas Thailand emphasised capacity focus. This also demonstrates a temporality between strategy, capacity, and operations foci in Korea, but Thailand attempted to fill the capacity gap through SDGs-oriented innovation. Insights from this empirical study can assist public managers in selecting innovation portfolio configurations applicable to their national context.","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138518765","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0