Measuring policy autonomy of public organizations: conceptual and methodological issues

Abstract

terms such as “output” or “outcome”. In the questionnaire, we therefore posed 4 multiple choice questions on policy autonomy. Two questions (question A and B in box 1) deal with the level of policy autonomy of the organization (the “agency”) in relation to the political principal (“the minister”). Two questions (question C and D in box 1) deal with the level of policy autonomy of the organization (the “agency”) in relation to the administrative oversight organisation (the “core department”). A. Which of following statements is most valid, considering the policy instruments (subsidies, ...) of the policy of your organization (1 answer)? B. Which of following statements is most valid, considering the target group of the policy of your organization (1 answer)? 1. Organization takes most of the decisions itself, minister only slightly involved in the decision making process and only sets few restrictions. 2. Organization takes most of the decisions itself, after having consulted the minister 3. Organization takes most of the decisions itself under conditions or restrictions set by the ministers 4. The minister takes most of the decisions, after having consulted the organization. 5. The minister takes most of the decisions, independently of the organization. C. Which of following statements is most valid, considering the policy instruments (subsidies etc.) for the policy of your organization, but now in relation to the core department of the organization (1 answer)? D. Which of following statements is most valid, considering the target group of the policy of your organization, but now in relation to the core department of the organization (1 answer)? 1. Organization takes most of the decisions itself, department only slightly involved in the decision making process and only sets few restrictions. 2. Organization takes most of the decisions itself, after having consulted the department 3. Organization takes most of the decisions itself under conditions or restrictions set by the department 4. The department takes most of the decisions, after having consulted the organization. 5. The department takes most of the decisions, independently of the organization. Box 1: survey questions on policy autonomy The rationale behind the multiple choice answer categories is that we assume a lower level of policy autonomy of the agency, ranging from answer category 1 to answer category 5. Answer category 1 assumes quasi total policy autonomy for the agency in choosing policy instruments or policy target groups (“minister or department only slightly involved, or setting only few restrictions”), while answer category 5 assumes no policy autonomy for the agency (“minister or department takes the decision, independently of the organization”). Hence, we were able to develop a scale ranging from “0” (no autonomy, answer category 5) to “1” (quasi total autonomy, answer category 1). In between lay three intermediate positions on the scale: “.25” (AC 4), “.5” (AC 3), and “.75” (AC 4). This leads to 4 scales of policy autonomy on which the agency can have a score in the range [0, .25, .5, .75, 1]: Autonomy in choosing target groups, vis-a-vis minister (PATGM) Autonomy in choosing policy instruments, vis-a-vis minister (PAINM) Autonomy in choosing target groups, vis-a-vis department (PATGD) Autonomy in choosing policy instruments, vis-a-vis department (PAIND) From which we derived two aggregated indexes of policy autonomy: Autonomy in choosing target groups (PATG), which is the combination of the indexes PATGM and PATGD, and is calculated by summing up the scores on both indexes and dividing this by two: (PATGM + PATGD)/2 = PATG. This results in an index having a scale with range [0, .125, .25, .375, .5, .625, .75, .875, 1] Autonomy in choosing policy instruments (PAIN), which is the combination of the indexes PAINM and PAIND, and is calculated by summing up the scores on both indexes and dividing this by two: (PAINM + PAIND)/2 = PATG. This results in an index having a scale with range [0, .125, .25, .375, .5, .625, .75, .875, 1] Empirical results. The following figures show the results of this analysis for the sample of Flemish externally autonomous public agencies. On the vertical axis I show the percentage on a certain position on the index, on the horizontal axis the indexes of policy autonomy are shown. The N of cases, mean and standard deviation for PATG are respectively [22, .82, and .18]. For PAIN this is [21, .83 and .24]. 0,000 0,125 0,250 0,375 0,500 0,625 0,750 0,875 1,000 PATG 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 4 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.