State retrenchment and administrative reform in Ireland: Probing comparative policy paradigms

Policy choices in response to crisis may carry consequences both for distributive outcomes and for the future policy capacity of the state itself. In this paper, we use conceptual heuristics to interpret policy practice. We examine the underlying policy paradigms shaping Irish government decisions in the aftermath of the European financial and economic crisis. We distinguish between two such paradigms- market-conforming and social equity - and apply them to three reform themes: reconfiguration of public budgets, the public service pay bargain, and the organizational profile of state competences. Our findings entail lessons for understanding the malleability of policy choice, and how state policy choices in response to crisis are framed and implemented.

Reforming the Westminster Model of Agency Governance: Britain and Ireland after the Crisis

Conventional understandings of what the Westminster model implies anticipate reliance on a top-down, hierarchical approach to budgetary accountability, reinforced by a post–New Public Management emphasis on recentralizing administrative capacity. This article, based on a comparative analysis of the experiences of Britain and Ireland, argues that the Westminster model of bureaucratic control and oversight itself has been evolving, hastened in large part due to the global financial crisis. Governments have gained stronger controls over the structures and practices of agencies, but agencies are also key players in securing better governance outcomes. The implication is that the crisis has not seen a return to the archetypal command-and-control model, nor a wholly new implementation of negotiated European-type practices, but rather a new accountability balance between elements of the Westminster system itself that have not previously been well understood.

Institutional Hybridity in Public Sector Reform: Replacement, Blending, or Layering of Administrative Paradigms

Despite an abundance of studies on hybridization and hybrid forms of organizing, scholarly work has failed to distinguish consistently between specific types of hybridity. As a consequence, the analytical category has become blurred and lacks conceptual clarity. Our paper discusses hybridity as the simultaneous appearance of institutional logics in organizational contexts, and differentiates the parallel co-existence of logics from transitional combinations (eventually leading to the replacement of a logic) and more robust combinations in the form of layering and blending. While blending refers to hybridity as an ‘amalgamate’ with original components that are no longer discernible, the notion of layering conceptualizes hybridity in a way that the various elements, or clusters thereof, are added on top of, or alongside, each other, similar to sediment layers in geology. We illustrate and substantiate such conceptual differentiation with an empirical study of the dynamics of public sector reform. In more detail, we examine the parliamentary discourse around two major reforms of the Austrian Federal Budget Law in 1986 and in 2007/2009 in order to trace administrative (reform) paradigms. Each of the three identified paradigms manifests a specific field-level logic with implications for the state and its administration: bureaucracy in Weberian-style Public Administration, market-capitalism in New Public Management, and democracy in New Public Governance. We find no indication of a parallel co-existence or transitional combination of logics, but hybridity in the form of robust combinations. We explore how new ideas fundamentally build on – and are made resonant with – the central bureaucratic logic in a way that suggests layering rather than blending. The conceptual findings presented in our article have implications for the literature on institutional analysis and institutional hybridity.

People and places: Understanding geographical accuracy in administrative data from the census and healthcare systems

Administrative systems such as health care registration are of increasing importance in providing information for statistical, research, and policy purposes. There is thus a pressing need to understand better the detailed relationship between population characteristics as recorded in such systems and conventional censuses. This paper explores these issues using the unique Northern Ireland Longitudinal Study (NILS). It takes the 2001 Census enumeration as a benchmark and analyses the social, demographic and spatial patterns of mismatch with the health register at individual level. Descriptive comparison is followed by multivariate and multilevel analyses which show that approximately 25% of individuals are reported to be in different addresses and that age, rurality, education, and housing type are all important factors. This level of mismatch appears to be maintained over time, as earlier migrants who update their address details are replaced by others who have not yet done so. In some cases, apparent mismatches seem likely to reflect complex multi-address living arrangements rather than data error.