Suchergebnisse

Proper roles for government and market in addressing policy problems may be assessed by considering the duality between market imperfections and government imperfections. The potential of government interventions or market mechanisms as core policy instruments can be eroded by fundamental deficiencies deeply rooted in either government or market as social institutions. The impacts of such deficiencies are much more extensive than postulated by the existing theories. Analysis here, based on policy innovations in land transport and health care in Singapore, suggests how policy mixes might become the norm of response for addressing policy problems found in a range of sectors. The analytical framework presented may help to distinguish among different policy mixes according to their effectiveness, but also provides some useful guiding principles for policy design. Adapted from the source document.

ABSTRACTMarket‐oriented reforms in the health sector continue to dominate health policy agendas in many developing countries despite growing evidence of their negative impacts. This article critically examines eight key arguments that are used to justify market‐oriented reforms and that continue to hold widespread appeal among policy makers and analysts. The authors conclude that although the axiom that health care is atypical due to pervasive market failures is widely acknowledged by reformers, the scope and depth of the negative consequences of market competition and private sector involvement are systematically underestimated in policy design and implementation, while the regulatory capacity to overcome them is overestimated. Their analysis suggests that while there is considerable scope for market‐oriented reforms, the success of such reforms depends on a tight set of conditions that are often absent in the health care sector, especially but not exclusively in developing countries.

This paper compares health policy trends in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand with the purpose of drawing usable lessons in reform. The study finds that governments in the region are rapidly privatizing the provision of healthcare at the same time as they are expanding the government's role in financing. The paper argues that expansion of public financing at the same time as private provision is misconceived as the combination would aggravate instances and severity of market failures peculiar to the sector. The dysfunctional trend is particularly evident in Indonesia and the Philippines. In Thailand, in contrast, the expansion of public financing has occurred in the context of a health system dominated by public providers, which has had the effect of restraining healthcare costs. Malaysia occupies a mid position between Indonesia and the Philippines on the one hand and Thailand on the other. All four cases underline the value of state capacity in designing optimal policies and implementing them effectively. (Pac Rev/GIGA)

Over the past two decades thinking about the role of politics in the policy process has taken several different shapes. Analysts in the "positivist" school of policy analysis have tended to use restricted notions of politics in their search for policy determinants or causes of policy change. This approach can be contrasted usefully with "postpositivist" analyses, which emphasize the role played by policy discourses in the policy process. This article discusses the manner in which policy networks and policy communities integrate ideas and interests in public policymaking and provide an opportunity to overcome the positivist/post‐positivist conceptual dichotomy. It proposes a model setting out how different subsystem configurations relate to paradigmatic and intraparadigmatic processes of policy change. The paper suggests that the identification of the nature of the policy subsystem in a given policy sector reveals a great deal about its propensity to respond to changes in ideas and interests and is therefore a good indicator of the likely effect "politics," in either the restrictive or broad sense of the term, will have on policymaking.

The spread of privatization in almost every country over the last decade reflects a rapid and fundamental change in patterns of policy instrument usage. Yet the literature on policy instruments has almost nothing to say on this perhaps most significant development in public policy in recent times. This paper's objective is to aid in the development of a theory of policy instrument choice which is capable of dealing with instances of long‐term, cross‐national changes in policy instrument usage. It will be argued that reconceptualization of instrument choices in terms of policy learning can aid in this theoretical project.