Cross-sectoral partnerships are increasingly seen as a solution to the most pressing social problems facing contemporary societies. Sectoral rationales for partnership suggest that public, private, and nonprofit organizations each possess distinctive advantages that can enhance the effectiveness, efficiency, and equity of public agencies’ efforts to address social issues. We present an exploratory quantitative examination of this argument, using primary and secondary data from 46 UK local government service departments. The results indicate that public-public partnership is positively associated with effectiveness, efficiency, and equity, but that public-private partnership is negatively associated with effectiveness and equity. Public-nonprofit partnership is unrelated to performance. Our study therefore suggests that cross-sectoral partnership does deliver, but that the prospects of public service improvement may depend on the sectoral choice that organizations make.

Does cross-sectoral partnership deliver? An empirical exploration of public service effectiveness, efficiency, and equity

Public management: The New Zealand model

Rethinking New Public Management Delivery Forms and Efficiency: Long-Term Effects in Spanish Local Government

This article looks at the use of institutionalized public–private partnership (PPP) arrangements by local governments for the delivery of different types of infrastructure It starts by analyzing the mixed company model from a theoretical point of view, in particular the potential for internal regulation and the achievement of a relational agreement Then, after discussing the practicalities of crafting this type of governance structure, four Portuguese case studies are examined The empirical evidence on mixed companies operating in the water, waste, transportation, and education sectors shows that the extreme complexity involved in the whole life-cycle management of these companies usually leads to a poor protection of the public interest

/pdf/mixed-companies-and-local-governance-no-man-can-serve-two-18351cya0y.pdf

Mixed companies and local governance: no man can serve two masters

This article looks at the use of institutionalized public–private partnership (PPP) arrangements by local governments for the delivery of different types of infrastructure. It starts by analyzing the mixed company model from a theoretical point of view, in particular the potential for internal regulation and the achievement of a relational agreement. Then, after discussing the practicalities of crafting this type of governance structure, four Portuguese case studies are examined. The empirical evidence on mixed companies operating in the water, waste, transportation, and education sectors shows that the extreme complexity involved in the whole life-cycle management of these companies usually leads to a poor protection of the public interest.

The new public management includes a portfolio of prescriptions that involve reconfiguring the boundaries of government agencies. One form of reconfiguration is corporatization. Corporatization creates separate agencies that have a contractlike relationship with a ministry or oversight agencies. Corporatization usually comprises a portfolio of changes that attempt to make agencies more "businesslike." Although corporatization is now popular with governments around the world, there is little empirical evidence on its performance impact. This article analyzes 11 corporatizations in Canada by the federal and Quebec governments. We first present hypotheses based on principal-agent theory concerning the potential impact of corporatization. For each agency, we compare the behavior and performance for 3 years prior to corporatization to the 3 years subsequent to corporatization. The aggregate results suggest that the introduction of corporatization did alter behavior on a number of dimensions. The results show that output and revenues increased, the revenues-to-expenditures coverage gap narrowed, and cost-efficiency and employee productivity improved following corporatization. Most of these changes were statistically significant.

/pdf/choice-of-organizational-form-makes-a-real-difference-the-rt5l2teuvm.pdf

Nancy Bilodeau

Papers

“Choice of Organizational Form Makes a Real Difference”: The Impact of Corporatization on Government Agencies in Canada