The frontier of social impact finance in the public sector: Theory and two case studies

Author(s):  
Leonardo Becchetti ◽  
Fabio Pisani ◽  
Francesco Salustri ◽  
Lorenzo Semplici
2019 ◽  
pp. 150-177
Author(s):  
Alex Griffiths

This chapter focuses on one particularly salient application of algorithmic regulation in the public sector—for the purposes of risk assessment to inform decisions about the allocation of enforcement resources, focusing on their accuracy and effectiveness in risk prediction. Drawing on two UK case studies in health care and higher education, it highlights the limited effectiveness of algorithmic regulation in these contexts, drawing attention to the pre-requisites for algorithmic regulation to fully play to its predictive strengths. In so doing, it warns against any premature application of algorithmic regulation to ever-more regulatory domains, serving as a sober reminder that delivering on the claimed promises of algorithmic regulation is anything but simple, straightforward or ‘seamless’.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 441-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Kerr

Presenting a large threat to irreplaceable heritage, property, cultural knowledge and cultural economies across the world, heritage and cultural property crimes offer case studies through which to consider the challenges, choices and practices that shape 21st-century policing. This article uses empirical research conducted in England & Wales, France and Italy to examine heritage and cultural property policing. It considers the threat before investigating three crucial questions. First, who is involved in this policing? Second, how are they involved in this policing? Third, why are they involved? This last question is the most important and is central to the article as it examines why, in an era of severe economic challenges for the governments in the case studies, the public sector would choose to lead policing.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 3049 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nannan Wang ◽  
Minxun Ma ◽  
Yunfei Liu

The management role of the public sector in public–private partnership PPP infrastructure projects has been extensively expanded to the whole lifecycle rather than in the traditional infrastructure projects. The performance of the public sector in a PPP is the key for the PPP to achieve sustainability; however, there is a lack of research on the whole lifecycle management efficiency of the public sector in a PPP. This research aims to examine the governance role of the public sector in PPP projects, and therefore evaluate their whole lifecycle management efficiency. An evaluation framework is developed through the lens of governmentality to evaluate the performance of the public sector. Multiple case studies on PPP infrastructure projects in China have identified loopholes during the whole lifecycle of a PPP at the local governmental level. On the basis of the findings of case studies, a conceptual model is proposed to demonstrate ways for the public sector to improve efficiency through integrated governance of PPP projects. The research findings benefit both the central government in terms of evaluation and decision making and the local government by improving their efficiency in PPP infrastructure projects for the purpose of achieving sustainability. According to the findings, policy strategies are provided for the central government on how to further regulate the PPP market and address the loopholes, including further standardizing regulations and instruction, providing unified quantitative calculation or measurement tools, training, and education for the public sector to integrate whole lifecycle project management, and quality control of consultancy for the PPP infrastructure projects.


Author(s):  
Amaya Erro-Garcés ◽  
Maria Elena Aramendía-Muneta

Three public European case studies are presented as an evaluation of a preliminary test of an adapted questionnaire to measure open social innovation. Findings include the differences and similarities between public and private performance. Public practitioners integrate these experiences later than private. The reasons for engaging in open innovation are different: whereas improving citizens´ relationships is the major public reason, creating partnerships is the private driver. Finally, technologies help open innovation in both public and private cases. Furthermore, it may be concluded that there is a lack of open social innovation professionals that leads to a barrier in the development of these policies in the public sector.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sally Hett

I was excited. When I started working I was excited about the social impact mandate inherent in the public sector – how good! Then, as my work led me into the depths of the public sector’s limitations, I was swallowed by despair. As an advisor on the Government Inquiry into Mental Health and Addiction I was a sponge to the pain of the country. I heard the pain in young people, solo mothers, whänau, refugees of not being heard, seen or supported. The reality of slow, siloed, under-resourced and overly risk-averse agencies was undeniable.


2008 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claude Rochet ◽  
Olivier Keramidas ◽  
Lugdivine Bout

According to the common vision, the public sector is strongly change-resistant. Is this justified? In this research, we adopt the Northian distinction between institutions and organizations by focusing on the latter and their capability for change. We try to identify the strategically most effective lever to operate an organizational change in the public sector. We first review the literature on change strategies and their setting in the context of public organizations. Then, we synthesize the conclusions of four case studies around a question: `Is building public organizations capable of co-evolution with their environment feasible?' We will present some strategies of evolution for public organizations, in response to a state of crisis, constituting a vector of organizational change. We conclude on the interest of considering crisis as a vector of organizational change in public organizations. Points for practitioners The public sector is commonly said to be change-resistant. Through case studies we prove this opinion to be false and that change aptitudes are identical to other organizations. We emphasize crises that provide particular opportunities that allow us to offset the absence of performance evaluation and the lack of feedback from the market, and we underline possible change strategies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document