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.

Balancing the (carbon) budget: Using linear inverse models to estimate carbon flows and mass-balance 13C:15N labelling experiments in low oxygen sediments.

Over 1 million km² of seafloor experience permanent low-oxygen conditions within oxygen minimum zones (OMZs). OMZs are predicted to grow as a consequence of climate change, potentially affecting oceanic biogeochemical cycles. The Arabian Sea OMZ impinges upon the western Indian continental margin at bathyal depths (150 - 1500 m) producing a strong depth dependent oxygen gradient at the sea floor. The influence of the OMZ upon the short term processing of organic matter by sediment ecosystems was investigated using in situ stable isotope pulse chase experiments. These deployed doses of ¹³C:¹⁵N labeled organic matter onto the sediment surface at four stations from across the OMZ (water depth 540 - 1100 m; [O₂] = 0.35 - 15 μM). In order to prevent experimentally anoxia, the mesocosms were not sealed. ¹³C and ¹⁵N labels were traced into sediment, bacteria, fauna and ¹³C into sediment porewater DIC and DOC. However, the DIC and DOC flux to the water column could not be measured, limiting our capacity to obtain mass-balance for C in each experimental mesocosm. Linear Inverse Modeling (LIM) provides a method to obtain a mass-balanced model of carbon flow that integrates stable-isotope tracer data with community biomass and biogeochemical flux data from a range of sources. Here we present an adaptation of the LIM methodology used to investigate how ecosystem structure influenced carbon flow across the Indian margin OMZ. We demonstrate how oxygen conditions affect food-web complexity, affecting the linkages between the bacteria, foraminifera and metazoan fauna, and their contributions to benthic respiration. The food-web models demonstrate how changes in ecosystem complexity are associated with oxygen availability across the OMZ and allow us to obtain a complete carbon budget for the stationa where stable-isotope labelling experiments were conducted.