Public services are increasingly delivered through hybrid settings of state and non-state actors. A key characteristic of such settings is the interaction between these actors. Different interactions may have different impacts on the outcomes of the particular settings. Yet to date, this key characteristic has received limited attention in scholarship. This article addresses this knowledge gap by presenting an exploratory comparative case study of two very similar hybrid settings that differ in the type of interaction between state and non-state actors.
BurkeyJ.HarrisT. R. (2006). Impacts of privatization. Social Science Journal, 43, 617-628.
11.
CelliniR.PignataroG.RizzoI. (2000). Competition and efficiency in health care. International Tax and Public Finance, 7, 503-519.
12.
CreswellJ. W.MillerD. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39, 124-130.
13.
DanielsN. (1990). Equality of what: Welfare, resources, or capabilities?Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 1, 73-98.
14.
DavidsonA. (1999). Alternative mode of social housing. Housing Studies, 14, 453-472.
15.
Della PortaD. (2008). Comparative analysis: Case-oriented versus variable oriented research. In Della PortaD.KeatingM. (Eds.), Approaches and methodologies in the social sciences (pp. 198-222). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16.
DickersonM. O.FlanaganT. (1998). An introduction to government and politics. Scarborough, Ontario, Canada: International Thomson Publishing.
17.
DowdingK. (2006). Can capabilities reconcile freedom and equality?Journal of Political Philosophy, 14, 323-336.
18.
FotakiM. (2011). Towards developing new partnerships in public services. Public Administration, 89, 933-955.
19.
FotakiM.BoydA.SmithL.McDonaldR.RonaldM.SheaffR.ElwynG. (2005). Patient choice and the organisation and delivery of health services. Manchester, UK: University of Manchester.
20.
FotakiM.RolandM.BoydA.McDonaldR.ScheaffR.SmithL. (2008). What benefits will choice bring to patients?Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 13, 178-184.
21.
GalanterM. (1974). Why the “haves” come out ahead. Law & Society Review, 9, 95-160.
22.
GiddensA. (2000). The third way and its critics. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
23.
GreenerI.PowellM. (2008). The evolution of choice policies in UK housing, education and health policy. Journal of Social Policy, 38, 63-81.
24.
GunninghamN. (2002). Regulating small and medium sized enterprises. Journal of Environmental Law, 14, 3-32.
25.
GunninghamN.GraboskyP. (1998). Smart regulation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
HamC.BrommelsM. (1994). Health care reforms in the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Health Affairs, 13, 106-119.
28.
HansenA. T. (1985). The regulation of building construction. Ottawa, Ontario: National Research Council Canada.
29.
HarveyD. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
30.
HodgeG. A. (2000). Privatization: An international review of performance. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
31.
JacksonR. J.JacksonD. (2003). An introduction to political science: Comparative and world politics. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Prentice Hall.
32.
JordanA.WurzelR.ZitoA. (2005). The rise of new policy instruments in comparative perspective. Political Studies, 53, 477-496.
33.
KorpiW.PalmeJ. (1988). The paradox of redistribution and strategies of equality. American Sociological Review, 63, 661-687.
34.
LandesW. M.PosnerR. A. (1975). The private enforcement of law. Journal of Legal Studies, 4, 1-46.
35.
Le GrandJ. (2007). The politics of choice and competition in public services. Political Quarterly, 78, 207-213.
36.
Levi-FaurD. (2006). A question of size? In RihouxB.GrimmH. (Eds.), Innovative comparative methods for policy analysis (pp. 43-66). New York, NY: Springer/Kluwer.
37.
LiebersonS. (1992). Small N’s and big conclusions. In RaginC. C.BeckerG. S. (Eds.), What is a case? (pp. 105-118). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
38.
LonghurstR. (2003). Semi-structured interviews and focus groups. In CliffordN. J.ValentineG. (Eds.), Key methods in geography (pp. 117-132). London, England: Sage.
39.
LovegroveK. (1991). The primary building acts of Australia. Sydney, Australia: The Federation Press.
40.
McCrackenG. (1988). The long interview (Vol. 13). London, England: Sage.
41.
MerriamS. B. (1995). What can you tell from an N of 1?PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 4, 51-60.
42.
MillJ. S. (1851). A system of logic (3rd ed.). London, England: Longmans, Green, & Co. (Original work published 1843)
43.
MinowM. (2011). Confronting the seduction of choice. Yale Law Journal, 120, 814-848.
44.
National Research Council Canada. (2005). National building code of Canada, 2005. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Author.
45.
NoorderhavenN. G. (1995). Transaction, interaction, institutionalization. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 11, 43-55.
PetersenJ. H. (2010). Marketization and free choice in the provision of social services. In KettunenP.PetersenK. (Eds.), Beyond welfare state models (pp. 170-198). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
50.
PiersonC.CastelesF. (Eds.). (2006). The welfare state reader (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
51.
PriceB. E. (2007). The treat of privatization. International Journal of Public Administration, 30, 1141-1155.
52.
Productivity Commission. (2004). Reform of building regulation. Melbourne, Australia: Productivity Commission, Commonwealth of Australia.
53.
PrzeworskiA.TeuneH. (1970). The logic of comparative social inquiry. New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience.
RaginC. C. (2000). Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
56.
RaginC. C.StrandS. I. (2008). Using qualitative comparative analysis to study causal order. Sociological Methods & Research, 36, 431-441.
57.
RothsteinB. (1998). Just institutions matter. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
58.
SealeC.GoboG.GubriumJ. F.SilvermanD. (2004). Qualitative research practice. London, England: Sage.
59.
SilvermanD. (2001). Interpreting qualitative data (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage.
60.
SparrowM. K. (2000). The regulatory craft. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
61.
StokerG. (1998). Governance as theory: Five propositions. International Social Science Journal, 50, 17-28.
62.
StoneD. A. (2002). Policy paradox. New York, NY: Norton.
63.
TrubekD.TrubekL. G. (2007). New governance and legal regulation. Columbia Journal of European Law, 13, 539-564.
64.
Van der HeijdenJ. (2010a). One task, a few approaches, many impacts: Private sector involvement in Canadian building control. Canadian Public Administration, 53, 351-374.
65.
Van der HeijdenJ. (2010b). On peanuts and monkeys: Private sector involvement in Australian building control. Urban Policy and Research, 28, 195-2101.
66.
Van der HeijdenJ. (2011). Friends, enemies or strangers? On relationships between public and private sector service providers in hybrid forms of governance. Law & Policy, 33, 367-390.
67.
Van SlykeD. M. (2003). The mythology of privatization in contracting for social services. Public Administration Review, 63, 296-315.
68.
Victorian Competition and Efficiency Commission. (2005). Housing regulation in Victoria, Final Report. Melbourne, Australia: Author.
69.
WilliamsonO. E. (1996). The mechanisms of governance. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
70.
WilsonJ. Q. (1989). Bureaucracy. New York, NY: Basic Books.
71.
YoungD. R. (2006). Complementary, supplementary, or adversarial? In BorisE. T.SteureleC. E. (Eds.), Nonprofits and government (pp. 37-80). Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
