Suchergebnisse

This paper discusses possible conceptual foundations of formal models of endogenous change processes, understood here as movements between market and non-market transactions at the level of the national economy. It links but does not merge movements of resources with shifts in the pattern of transaction types. In focussing on transaction types, it deploys insights from Commons, Coase, and Godelier, to discuss how framing transaction types as the fundamental 'thing to be explained' points to the value of choices about how activity may best be organised, which requires a general concept, which can be found in Commons' 'going concern', applicable to transactions focussing on markets or not. It entails the possibility of institutional change and shifts in the location of economic resources without formal policy change. It suggests that the main requirement for such change processes are dualistic incentive patterns that operate upon institutional choice and/or development, which derive at root from experienced contrasts between the realities of existing and normatively privileged systems, and others, normatively initially deemed inferior, that offer key actors greater economic efficiency. Moves of institutional activity from one to the other are thus conceptually processes of endogenous systemic change. System in this sense is thus viewed as a coexistence of alternatives. The motivation comes directly from consideration of two very different historical moments: endogenously driven shifts 'from plan to market' in countries attempting central planning, and contemporary pressures in market economies from areas of the economy, such as services, where joint production and/or own consumption imply irremediable market failure and so non-market based economic institutions offer greater economic efficiency and may therefore attract both resources (factors of production) and investment in development of suitable transactions and their organisation.

AbstractSince the financial crisis, Ireland's welfare state has been reorientated around a regulatory, 'work-first' activation model. Claimants now face penalty rates for non-compliance with activation requirements that have been significantly extended since 2009. Alongside these formal policy reforms, the organisations delivering Public Employment Services, and the modes by which they are commissioned, have also been reconfigured through a series of New Public Management style governance reforms, including, most notably, the creation of a quasi-market for employment services (JobPath) in 2015. This article addresses the intersection between activation and quasi-marketisation, positioning the latter as a form of 'double activation' that reshapes not onlyhowbut alsowhatpolicies are enacted at the street level. It unpacks their shared logics and mutual commitment to governing agents at a distance through a behavioural public policy orientation, and reflects on the extent to which marketisation is capable of producing lower-cost but more responsive employment services.

Fearful symmetry? : higher education and the logic of the market / Peter John and Joelle Fanghanel -- Private commodities and public goods : markets and values in higher education / Peter Scott -- Paying the price of expansion : why more for undergraduates in England means less for everyone / Helen Carasso and William Locke -- Choice in the learning market : tokenistic ritual or democratic education? / Rajani Naidoo -- Marketing and marketisation : what went wrong, and how we can put it right? / Rob Cuthbert -- Scotland and the higher education market / Tony Bruce -- Contractualising the student experience through university charters / Joanna Williams -- Uk universities as a single entity : striking a balance between public and private needs / Bernard Longden -- Some considerations on higher education as a "post-experience good" / Morgan White -- The "unravelling" of English higher education / Patrick Ainley -- Regulating risk in the higher education state: implications for policy and research / Roger King -- How the Home Office became a regulator of higher education in England / Geoffrey Alderman -- Making a difference : the roles of markets and the roles of quality assurance regimes / John Brennan -- Shifting perspectives on research and teaching relationships : a view from Australia / Angela Brew -- Developing criticality in learning and teaching through pedagogical action research / Lin Norton -- Reshaping understandings, practices and policies to enhance the links between teaching and research / Alan Jenkins and Mick Healey -- Engaging the international scholarly and policy community through active dialogue on the research-teaching nexus / Vaneeta D'Andrea -- A critical reflection on leadership in higher education / Robin Middlehurst -- Reflections on evidence and higher education policy / Gareth Williams -- Academic quality and academic responsibility: a critical reflection on collegial governance / David D. Dill -- Policy, what policy? : considering the university in the twenty-first century / Ronald Barnett -- Higher education and the market : thoughts, themes, threads / Joelle Fanghanel and Peter John

This collection offers a comprehensive review of the origins, scale and breadth of the privatisation and marketisation revolution across the criminal justice system. Leading academics and researchers assess the consequences of market-driven criminal justice in a wide range of contexts, from prison and probation to policing, migrant detention, rehabilitation and community programmes. Using economic, sociological and criminological perspectives, illuminated by accessible case studies, they consider the shifting roles and interactions of the public, private and voluntary sectors. As privatisation, outsourcing and the impact of market cultures spread further across the system, the authors look ahead to future developments and signpost the way to reform in a 'post-market' criminal justice sphere

This paper considers criminal justice policy in England and Wales since the Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) agenda implemented in 2013. TR rested on the proposition that probation services are best provided in a market context. Motivated by profit and extrinsic rewards, private sector consortia, and their employees, theoretically act efficiently to deter and rehabilitate offenders from crime. However, there is evidence that marketisation itself undermines the prospects of efficient social policy. Over-reliance on markets may undermine pro-social norms through emphasising individualism and extrinsic returns. Outsourcing is also associated with increasing inequality, which may also undermine pro-social norms. Further, the emphasis placed on self-interest in framing market-based incentive structures is associated with declining public welfare support for the economically marginalised and increased use of relatively expensive incarceration. In application, TR proved unsustainable. The innovation involves increasing reliance on the para-state sector, in which private profits rely on public payment. However, the profits expected under TR fell short of expectations, in part due to changes in wider society. The early cancellation of TR contracts highlights the inflexible nature of such public sector procurement. On the basis of theory and practice, we suggest a reconsideration of the government's position on probation and set out reasonable steps to address shortcomings in the current system.

This paper considers criminal justice policy in England and Wales since the Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) agenda implemented in 2013. TR rested on the proposition that probation services are best provided in a market context. Motivated by profit and extrinsic rewards, private sector consortia, and their employees, theoretically act efficiently to deter and rehabilitate offenders from crime. However, there is evidence that marketisation itself undermines the prospects of efficient social policy. Over-reliance on markets may undermine pro-social norms through emphasising individualism and extrinsic returns. Outsourcing is also associated with increasing inequality, which may also undermine pro-social norms. Further, the emphasis placed on self-interest in framing market-based incentive structures is associated with declining public welfare support for the economically marginalised and increased use of relatively expensive incarceration. In application, TR proved unsustainable. The innovation involves increasing reliance on the para-state sector, in which private profits rely on public payment. However, the profits expected under TR fell short of expectations, in part due to changes in wider society. The early cancellation of TR contracts highlights the inflexible nature of such public sector procurement. On the basis of theory and practice, we suggest a reconsideration of the government's position on probation and set out reasonable steps to address shortcomings in the current system.