Torn between state and market: Private policy implementation and conflicting institutional logics*. Issue 1 (1st March 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Thomann, Eva; Lieberherr, Eva; Ingold, Karin
• Is Part Of: Policy & society. Volume 35:Issue 1(2016:Mar.)
• Page Start: 57
• Page End: 69
• Publication Date: 2016-03-01
• Subjects: Policy sciences -- Periodicals; Social policy -- Periodicals; Economic policy -- Periodicals; International relations -- Periodicals; Sciences de la politique -- Périodiques; Politique sociale -- Périodiques; Politique économique -- Périodiques; Relations internationales -- Périodiques; Australia -- Politics and government -- 1945- -- Periodicals; Australia -- Economic conditions -- 1945- -- Periodicals; Pacific Area -- Politics and government -- Periodicals; Pacific Area -- Economic conditions -- Periodicals; Australie -- Politique et gouvernement -- 1945- -- Périodiques; Australie -- Conditions économiques -- 1945- -- Périodiques; Pacifique, Région du -- Politique et gouvernement -- Périodiques; Pacifique, Région du -- Conditions économiques -- Périodiques; 320.605
• DOI: 10.1016/j.polsoc.2015.12.001
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1449-4035

Abstract

Abstract: Policy implementation by private actors constitutes a "missing link" for understanding the implications of private governance. This paper proposes and assesses an institutional logics framework that combines a top-down, policy design approach with a bottom-up, implementation perspective on discretion. We argue that the conflicting institutional logics of the state and the market, in combination with differing degrees of goal ambiguity, accountability and hybridity play a crucial role for output performance. These arguments are analyzed based on a secondary analysis of seven case studies of private and hybrid policy implementation in diverging contexts. We find that aligning private output performance with public interests is at least partly a question of policy design congruence: private implementing actors tend to perform deficiently when the conflicting logics of the state and the market combine with weak accountability mechanisms.