Should We Change The Way We Think About Market Performance When It Comes To Quasi-Markets? A New Framework For Evaluating Public Service Markets

Helen Dickinson, Gemma Carey, Eleanor Malbon, David Gilchrist, Satish Chand, Anne Kavanagh, Damon Alexander

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)
81 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Markets are increasingly used by governments to deliver social services, underpinned by the belief that they can drive efficiency and quality. These ‘quasi‐markets’ require on‐going management to ensure they meet policy goals, and address issues of market inequity. This has seen debates emerge around ‘market stewardship’ and ‘market shaping’ that centre on how best to manage markets towards optimal policy outcomes. At present there is a significant gap in both literature and practice with regard to what types of actions are most effective for market stewardship. In this article we outline a framework that helps diagnose different quasi‐market problems. We delineate two dimensions of public service quasi‐markets – sufficiency and diversity – using the example of a disability personalisation market to show how this framework can unpack different types of quasi‐market states. Lastly, we outline the types of interventions that might be adopted to help deal with ineffective quasi‐markets.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)897-901
Number of pages5
JournalPublic Administration Review
Volume82
Issue number5
Early online date8 Apr 2021
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2022

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Should We Change The Way We Think About Market Performance When It Comes To Quasi-Markets? A New Framework For Evaluating Public Service Markets'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this