Search

To improve sustainable service provision, the public sector has been repeatedly subject to administrative reforms. Yet, the question arises of which types of organizations might be preferred. To address this, we systematically analyze which water supply organizations decision-makers and stakeholders, across different levels of government in Switzerland, prefer. We find that the actors prefer public organizations that involve coordination between municipalities and reject private organizations. Distinguishing between different actor levels reveals a distinct pattern, mainly related to the level of responsibility: the national (confederation) and regional (cantonal) actors only prefer coordination across municipalities, where local politicians lose a degree of control. In contrast, the local actors prefer those organizations where they can maintain democratic control the most. However, such organizations are not expected to perform sustainably, mainly because of lengthy decision-making processes, lack of access to external funds, and short-term financial planning. We, thus, conclude that, at the local level, there is potentially a trade-off between democratic values and performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy scholars typically assume that implementing actors should follow democratically decided rules in linear, predictable ways. However, this assumption does not factor in the operational challenges and multiple accountability relations facing policy implementers in contemporary, hybrid policy implementation settings. Shifting the focus to throughput (governance process) and output legitimacy (results), this paper explores how throughput dimensions affect the implementation of policy outputs. We study a hybrid policy—the Swiss Forest Policy 2020—in a federalist, multi-level implementation context. We find that accountability dilemmas have negative consequences for output implementation, particularly when professionalism clashes with rules. Accountability dilemmas are exacerbated by policy incoherence and interact with policy ambiguity. However, high issue salience can partially compensate for the negative effects of these factors. In sum, we highlight how the role of implementing actors in democratic countries goes beyond rule-following: accountability relations and other throughput dimensions crucially affect output legitimacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent public sector reforms have led to horizontalization, where public service providers have increased autonomy from the state. Such changes lead to queries about democratic responsiveness (input legitimacy), democratic procedures and efficacy (throughput legitimacy) and effectiveness (output legitimacy). The following question thus emerges: how and why does horizontalization affect input, output and throughput legitimacy? This inquiry is addressed by analysing two Swiss wastewater service providers with differing degrees of horizontalization. The analysis indicates that horizontalization leads to more synergies than trade-offs between the legitimacy dimensions. Particularly, input and throughput legitimacy can play a pivotal role in attaining citizens’ acceptance. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]