Under new dimensions of individualisation, decentralisation and particularly marketisation, new forms of public-private partnerships between the actors involved in the employment services for the unemployed have emerged. This is because for-profit providers have now entered the arena of welfare to work. The assumption behind these public-private arrangements is that the marketisation of public service delivery will lead to more flexible, responsive and innovative outcomes. Focusing on the implementation of back-to-work services for the unemployed for the UK, the Netherlands and Australia as forerunners of this development, this article sketches several theoretical backgrounds and conditions for effective and efficient back-to-work services and gives an insight to the struggles countries face in controlling recalcitrant practice, their policy lessons and the outcomes of these struggles so far.
ArmstrongD.ByrneY.PattonL. and HorackS. (2009) Welfare to Work in the United States: New York's experience of the prime provider model, Research Report No 614, London, Department of Work and Pensions, available at http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/rports2009-2010/rrep614.pdf.
2.
Australian National Audit Office (2005) Implementation of Job Network Employment Services Contract 3, Audit Report No. 6 2005-06, Canberra, ANAO.
3.
BennmarketH.GrönqvistE.ÖckertB. (2009) Effects of Outsourcing Employment Services: Evidence from a randomized experiment, WP 2009:23, Uppsala, IFAU–Institutet för arbetsmarknadspolitisk utvärdering.
4.
BovairdT. (2004) ‘Public–Private Partnerships in Western Europe and the US: New Growths from Old Roots’ in GhobadinA.GallearD.O'ReganN. and VineyH. (eds.) Public–Private Partnerships, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 221–50.
5.
BovairdT. (2004) ‘Public–Private Partnerships: From Contested Concepts to Prevalent Practice’, International Review of Administrative Sciences70(2), 199–215.
6.
BredgaardT. (2008) ‘Quasi-markets’ in LilleyP. and HartwichO. (eds.) Paying for Success: How to make contracting out work in employment services, London, Policy Exchange.
7.
BredgaardT.LarsenF. and MollerL.R. (2005) ‘Contracting out the public employment service in Denmark: A quasi market analysis’ in BredgaardT. and LarsenF. (eds.) Employment Policy from Different Angles. Copenhagen, DJOEF Publishers, 175–189.
ClarkeJ. and NewmanJ. (1997) The Managerial State: Power, Politics and Ideology in the Remaking of Social Welfare, London, Sage Publications.
10.
DemiragI.DubnickM. and KhadarooM.I. (2004) ‘A Framework for Examining Accountability and Value for Money in the UK's Private Finance Initiative’, Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 15 (Autumn), 69–83.
DiamondJ. (2006) Au Revoir to Partnership: What's Next?’, International Journal of Public Sector Management19(3), 278–86.
13.
EdwardsP. and ShaoulJ. (2002) ‘Partnerships: For Better, For Worse?’Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 16(3), 397–421.
14.
FinnD.MasonD.RahimN.CasebourneJ. (2008) Delivering Benefits, Tax Credits and Employment Services. Problems for disadvantaged users and potential solutions, York, Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
15.
FinnD. (2008) The British ‘welfare market’. Lessons from contracting out welfare to work programmes in Australia and the Netherlands. Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
16.
FinnD. (2009) Differential pricing in contracted out employment programmes: Review of international evidence, Research Report No. 564, London, Department of Work and Pensions, available at http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/rports2009-2010/rrep564.pdf.
17.
FreudD. (2007) Reducing Dependency, Increasing Opportunity: Options for the future of welfare to work (the Freud Report), An Independent Report to the Department for Work and Pensions, Leeds, Corporate Document Services, accessed at www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/welfarereview.pdf.
18.
GreveC. and HodgeG. (2005) ‘Public–Private Partnerships: A Policy for All Seasons’ in HodgeG. and GreveC. (eds.) The Challenge of Public–Private Partnerships, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 332–49.
19.
HabibJ. (2008) ‘A Summary of International Literature on the Effects of Welfare to Work Programs on Entering Employment and a Brief Comparison to the Israeli Program’Jerusalem, Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute.
20.
HartO.ShleiferA. and VishnyR.W. (1997) ‘The Proper Scope of Government: Theory and Applications to Prisons’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), 1127–1161.
21.
HefetzA. and WarnerM.E. (2004) ‘Privatization and Its Reverse: Explaining the Dynamics of the Government Contracting Process’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14, 171–190.
22.
HelmanZ. (2007) ‘Springing the Unemployment Trap’, The Jerusalem Report, October 15.
23.
HodgeG. (2004) ‘The Risky Business of Public–Private Partnerships’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 63(4), 37–49.
24.
HoodC. (1991) ‘A Public Management for All Seasons?’Public Administration, 69, 3–19.
25.
JahnE. and OchelW. (2007) ‘Contracting out Employment Services: Temporary agency work in Germany’, Journal of European Social Policy, 7(2), 125–138.
26.
JessopB. (2004) ‘From the welfare state to the competition state’ in BauerP. and VoelzkowH. (eds.), Die Europäische Union – Marionette oder Regisseur?Wiesbaden: Springer Science and Business Media, 335–359.
27.
JordanH. (2008) International insights: Best practice in employment programmes, London, Ingeus/Work Directions.
28.
KoningP. (2009a) ‘Cream-skimming, Parking and other Intended and Unintended Effects of Performance-Based Contracting in Social Welfare Services’, CPB Discussion paper 134, The Hague, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, available at www.cpb.nl/nl/pub/cpbreeksen/discussie/135/disc134.pdf.
29.
KoningP. (2009b) ‘Contracting Welfare-to-Work Services: Use and Usefulness’, CPB Discussion paper 135, The Hague, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, available at www.cpb.nl/nl/pub/cpbreeksen/discussie/135/disc135.pdf.
30.
Konle-SeidlR. (2002) Steigerung von Effzienz und Reputation in der Arbeitsvermittlung. IAB Werkstattbericht 15/2002, Nurnberg, Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung.
31.
LamM. (2007) Performance measures for welfare-to-work programmes: The relevance of Australian star ratings to the UK, London, Work Directions UK.
32.
NielsenLehmann V.WinterS.C.PallesenT. and MayP. J. (2009) ‘Delegation, Discretion, and Implementation’, Paper for the Public Management Research Conference in Columbus, Ohio, 1–3 October.
33.
LilleyP. and HartwichO. (eds.) (2008) Paying for Success: How to make contracting out work in employment services, London, Policy Exchange.
34.
LinderS. (2000) ‘Coming to Terms with Public–Private Partnership’ in RosenauP. (ed.) Public–Private Policy Partnerships, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
35.
MabbettD. (2009) ‘Telling Tales from Abroad: Australia, the Netherlands and the welfare-to-work proposals in the UK, Benefits/ Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 17(2) 137–47.
36.
MayntzR. (ed.) (1983) Implementation politischer Programme II. Ansätze zur Theoriebildung, Königstein Ts, Verlagsgruppe Athenäum.
37.
MensenTh. (2009) Mobiliteitscentra: Van MCA tot MCZ (Mobility Centers: From MCA to MCZ), Sociaal Bestek, 7/8, 12–17.
OECD (2001) ‘Innovations in Labour Market Policies: The Australian Way’, Paris, OECD Publishing.
41.
OECD (2001) ‘Local Partnerships for Better Governance’, Paris, OECD Publishing.
42.
PawsonR. (2003) ‘Nothing as practical as a good theory’, Evaluation, 9(4), 471–490.
43.
PollittC. (2003) The Essential Public Manager, Maidenhead, Open University Press.
44.
Productivity Commission (2002) Independent Review of the Job Network, Inquiry Report No 21, Canberra, 3 June.
45.
RothsteinB. and SteinmoS. (eds.) (2002) Restructuring the Welfare State: Political institutions and policy change, New York, Palgrave.
46.
SchmidG.O'ReillyJ. and SchömannK. (1996) (eds.) International Handbook on Labour Market Policy and Evaluation, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.
47.
SmithS.R. (2002) ‘Privatization, devolution, and the welfare state: Rethinking the prevailing wisdom’ in RothsteinB. and SteinmoS. (eds.) Restructuring the welfare state: Political institutions and policy change, New York, Palgrave.
48.
SolE.SichertM.van LieshoutH. and KoningT. (2008) ‘Activation as a Socio-Economic and Legal Concept’ in EichhorstW.KaufmannO.Konle-SeidlR. and ReinhardH-J. (eds.) Bringing the Jobless into Work? Experiences with Activation Schemes in Europe and the US, Berlin-Heidelberg, Springer.
49.
SolE. and WesterveldM. (2005) Contractualism in Employment Services. A New Form of Welfare State Governance, The Hague, Kluwer Law International.
50.
SolE. (2000) Arbeidsvoorzieningsbeleid in Nederland. De rol van de overheid en de sociale partners. (Active labour market Policies in the Netherlands. The role of the State, Employer Associations and Trade Unions), The Hague, SDU Publishers.
51.
StruyvenL. (2007) ‘Between Efficiency and Equality: New public-private arrangements in employment assistance for the unemployed’ in KoningJ.D. (ed.) The Evaluation of Active Labour Market Policies: Measures, public-private partnerships and benchmarking, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.
