This article puts forward the notion of socio-technical resistance with an application to the regulation through performance indicators in the water sector. Governance failures are mainly explained by concentrating on governance design, considering regulation as a set of control mechanisms. We propose an alternative perspective by putting the emphasis on socio-technical resistance to take into account both human and non-human actors in the governance process. We observe the misuse of performance indicators by local actors in urban water systems in Europe to highlight the empirical significance of socio-technical resistance. Results support that socio-technical resistance is frequent and reduces significantly the reliability of the information gathered through performance indicators. Drawing on a new typology of resistance, we show socio-technical resistance is a dynamic combination of cognitive, interpretative, territorial, strategic, technical and structural factors. These results and the proposed notion underline a crucial limitation of public policies and regulation in the process of policy-instruments implementation and compliance. Empirically, it reveals particularly relevant to provide new insights on New public management and performance-based regulation, where measurement are crucial.
AlegreHHirnerWBaptistaJM, et al. (2000) Performance Indicators in Water Supply Systems – IWA Manual of Best Practice.
London:
IWA Publishing.
2.
AminAThriftN (2002) Cities: Reimagining the Urban.
London:
Polity Press.
3.
ArmstrongMSappingtonD (2006)
Regulation, competition and liberalization. Journal of Economic Literature44(2): 325–366.
4.
BajariPTadelisS (2001)
Incentives versus transaction costs: A theory of procurement contracts. The Rand Journal of Economics32(3): 387–407.
5.
BakkerKJ (2000)
Privatizing water, producing scarcity: The Yorkshire drought of 1995. Economic Geography76(1): 4–27.
6.
BaldwinRBlackJ (2008)
Really responsive regulation. The Modern Law Review71(1): 59–94.
7.
BaldwinRCaveMLodgeM (2012) Understanding Regulation: Theory, Strategy, and Practice.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
8.
BevanGWilsonD (2013)
Does ‘naming and shaming’ work for schools and hospitals? Lessons from natural experiments following devolution in England and Wales. Public Money & Management33(4): 245–252.
9.
BolognesiT (2014)
The paradox of the modernisation of urban water systems in Europe: Intrinsic institutional limits for sustainability. Natural Resources Forum38(4): 270–281.
10.
BolognesiT (2014b)
The results of modernizing network industries: The case of urban water services in Europe. Competition and Regulation in Network Industries15(4): 306–334.
11.
BolognesiT (2018) Modernization and Urban Water Governance: Organizational Change and Sustainability in Europe.
London:
Palgrave Macmillan.
12.
BolognesiTPfliegerG (2019)
In the shadow of sunshine regulation: Explaining disclosure biases. Regulation & Governance 15(1): 200--225.
13.
BrochetA (2015)
Petite histoire grenobloise du grand réseau, des origines de la cité à l’aube du XXe siècle. Urbanités6.
14.
BrochetA (2017)
Les Résistances Territorialisées Aux Réformes de Modernisation Des Services d’eau : Le Cas de l’agglomération Grenobloise. PhD Thesis, Université Grenoble Alpes.
15.
BrochetAHéraultCA (2014) Rapport D’enquête. Photographie Des Services D’eau Potable du Bassin Grenoblois.
Grenoble:
Communauté de l'Eau Potable de la Région Urbaine de Grenoble.
16.
CallonM (1990)
Techno‐economic networks and irreversibility. The Sociological Review38(1): 132–161.
17.
CannevaGGuérin-SchneiderL (2011a)
La construction des indicateurs de performance des services d’eau en France: mesurer le développement durable (The construction of performance indicators for water services in France: Measuring sustainable development). Natures Sciences Sociétés19(3): 213–223.
18.
CannevaGGuérin-SchneiderL (2011b)
National monitoring of water utility performance in France. Water Supply11(6): 745–753.
19.
ChongEHuetF (2009)
Yardstick competition, franchise bidding and firms’ incentives to collude. Review of Industrial Organization35(1–2): 149–169.
20.
ChongESaussierSSilvermanBS (2015)
Water under the bridge: Determinants of franchise renewal in water provision. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization31(1): 3–39.
21.
Colon M, Richard S and Roche PA (2018) The evolution of water governance in France from the 1960s: disputes as major drivers for radical changes within a consensual framework. Water International 43(1): 109--132.
22.
CommonsJR (1934) Institutional Economics. Its Place in Political Economy.
New York:
MacMillan.
23.
CreswellJW (2014) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. 4th ed.
Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
24.
CunninghamIJamesP (2017)
Analysing public service outsourcing: The value of a regulatory perspective. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space35(6): 958–974.
25.
DeckerC (2015) Modern Economic Regulation: An Introduction to Theory and Practice.
London:
Cambridge University Press.
26.
De HolanPM (2016)
The process of crafting resistance. Journal of Management Inquiry25(1): 93–95.
27.
De WitteKMarquesRC (2012)
Gaming in a benchmarking environment. A non-parametric analysis of benchmarking in the water sector. Water Policy14(1): 45–66.
28.
FingerMKunnekeRW (eds) (2011) International Handbook of Network Industries: The Liberalization of Infrastructure.
Cheltenham:
Edward Elgar Publishing.
29.
FinonDPerezY (2007)
The social efficiency of instruments of promotion of renewable energies: A transaction-cost perspective. Ecological Economics62(1): 77–92.
30.
FlemingP (2016)
Resistance and the “post-recognition” turn in organizations. Journal of Management Inquiry25(1): 106–105.
31.
FlemingPSpicerA (2008)
Beyond power and resistance new approaches to organizational politics. Management Communication Quarterly21(3): 301–309.
32.
FoucaultM (1977) “L’œil du pouvoir”, Dits et Ecrits, Tome III, n°195.
33.
FuenfschillingLTrufferB (2014)
The structuration of socio-technical regimes – Conceptual foundations from institutional theory. Research Policy43(4): 772–791.
34.
GeelsFW (2004)
From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems. Research Policy33(6–7): 897–920.
35.
GeelsFW (2010)
Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective. Research Policy39(4): 495–510.
36.
GerrishE (2016)
The impact of performance management on performance in public organizations: A meta-analysis. Public Administration Review76(1): 48–66.
37.
HowlettM (2009)
Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design. Policy Sciences42(1): 73–89.
38.
KawulichBB (2005)
Participant observation as a data collection method. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research6(2). Epub ahead of print 31 May 2005. DOI: 10.17169/fqs-6.2.466.
39.
KirkEAReevesADBlackstockKL (2007)
Path dependency and the implementation of environmental regulation. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy25(2): 250–268.
40.
KruegerRACaseyMA (2000) Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 3rd ed.Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
41.
KünnekeRGroenewegenJMénardC (2010)
Aligning modes of organization with technology: Critical transactions in the reform of infrastructures. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization75(3): 494–505.
42.
LaffontJ-JMartimortD (2009) The Theory of Incentives: The Principal-Agent Model.
Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
43.
LaffontJ-JTiroleJ (1993) A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation.
Cambridge:
MIT Press.
44.
LaplantineF (1996) La Description Ethnographique.
Paris:
Nathan.
45.
LascoumesPLe GalèsP (2007)
Introduction: Understanding public policy through its instruments: From the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumentation. Governance20(1): 1–21.
46.
LatourB (1990)
Technology is society made durable. The Sociological Review38(1): 103–131.
47.
Le BourhisJ-PLascoumesP (2014) Les résistances aux instruments de gouvernement. Essai d’inventaire et de typologie des pratiques. In: Halpern C, Lascoumes P, Le Galès P (eds) L’instrumentation de L’action Publique. Paris: Sciences Po Les Presses, pp.493–520.
48.
Le BrasD (2003) La Fiction Intercommunale: Etude du Processus de Construction Identitaire des Communautés D’agglomération de Grenoble, Lens-Liévin et Voiron. PhD Dissertation, EHESS, Paris.
49.
Le LannierAPorcherS (2014)
Efficiency in the public and private French water utilities: Prospects for benchmarking. Applied Economics46(5): 556–572.
50.
Le RoyE (1997) La face cachée du complexe normatif en afrique noir. In: Robert P-H, Soubiran-Paillet F, Van de Kerchove M (eds) Normes, Normes Juridiques, Normes Pénales, Pour Une Sociologie Des Frontières., Paris: L’Harmattan, pp.123–138.
51.
Le RoyE (2007)
Le tripode juridique. L'Année Sociologique57(2): 341–351.
52.
LewisJM (2015)
The politics and consequences of performance measurement. Policy and Society34(1): 1–12.
53.
LieberherrEFuenfschillingL (2016)
Neoliberalism and sustainable urban water sectors: A critical reflection of sector characteristics and empirical evidence. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy34(8): 1540–1555.
54.
McAdamRHazlettSACaseyC (2005)
Performance management in the UK public sector: Addressing multiple stakeholder complexity. International Journal of Public Sector Management18(3): 256–273.
ModellS (2009)
Institutional research on performance measurement and management in the public sector accounting literature: A review and assessment. Financial Accountability & Management25: 277–303.
57.
MüllerMSchurrC (2016)
Assemblage thinking and actor‐network theory: Conjunctions, disjunctions, cross‐fertilisations. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers41(3): 217–229.
58.
MullerP (2011) Les Politiques Publiques.
Paris:
PUF.
59.
MumbyDK (2005)
Theorizing resistance in organization studies a dialectical approach. Management Communication Quarterly19(1): 19–44.
60.
MumbyDKThomasRMartíI, et al. (2017)
Resistance redux. Organization Studies38(9): 1157–1183.
61.
OstromE (1992) Crafting Institutions for Self-Governing Irrigation Systems. California: Institute for Contemporary Studies.
62.
OstromE (2005) Understanding Institutional Diversity.
Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
63.
OstromE (2011)
Background on the institutional analysis and development framework. Policy Studies Journal39(1): 7–27.
64.
PezonCCannevaG (2009)
Petites communes et opérateurs privés: généalogie du ‘modèle français’ de gestion des services d’eau potable. Espaces et Sociétés139(4): 21–38.
65.
PollittC (2013)
The logics of performance management. Evaluation19(4): 346–363.
66.
PollittCBouckaertG (2017) Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis-into the Age of Austerity.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
67.
RenouY (2017)
Performance indicators and new governmentality of water utilities in France. International Review of Administrative Sciences83(2): 378–396.
68.
RenouYBolognesiT (2018)
Governing urban water services in Europe: Towards sustainable synchronous regimes. Journal of Hydrology573: 994–1006.
69.
RomanoGGuerriniA (2011)
Measuring and comparing the efficiency of water utility companies: A data envelopment analysis approach. Utilities Policy19(3): 202–209.
70.
RossSA (1973)
The economic theory of agency: The principal’s problem. The American Economic Review63(2): 134–139.
71.
SalethM-RDinarA (2004) The Institutional Economics of Water: A Cross-Country Analysis of Institutions and Performance.
Cheltenham:
Edward Elgar.
72.
SauruggerSTerpanF (2016)
Resisting ‘new modes of governance’: An agency-centred approach. Comparative European Politics14(1): 53–70.
73.
SaussierS (2000)
Transaction costs and contractual incompleteness: The case of électricité de France. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization42(2): 189–206.
74.
ShleiferA (1985)
A theory of yardstick competition. The RAND Journal of Economics16(3): 319–327.
75.
SmithAStirlingABerkhoutF (2005)
The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions. Research Policy34(10): 1491–1510.
76.
SpekléRFVerbeetenFHM (2014)
The use of performance measurement systems in the public sector: Effects on performance. Management Accounting Research25(2): 131–146.
SutinenJGKuperanK (1999)
A socio‐economic theory of regulatory compliance. International Journal of Social Economics26(1/2/3): 174–193.
79.
TalbotC (2010) Theories of Performance.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
80.
ThomasRDaviesA (2005)
Theorizing the micro-politics of resistance: New public management and managerial identities in the UK public services. Organization Studies26(5): 683–706.
81.
TorreABeuretJE (2012) Proximités Territoriales: Construire la Gouvernance Des Territoires, Entre Conventions, Conflits et Concertations.
Paris:
Economica.
82.
Tsanga-TabiMVerdonD (2014)
New public service performance management tools and public water governance: The main lessons drawn from action research conducted in an urban environment. International Review of Administrative Sciences80(1): 213–235.
83.
Van ThielSLeeuwFL (2002)
The performance paradox in the public sector. Public Performance & Management Review25(3): 267–281.
84.
VerbeetenFHM (2008)
Performance management practices in public sector organizations: Impact on performance. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal21(3): 427–454.
85.
WesselinkABuchananKSGeorgiadouZ, et al. (2013)
Technical knowledge, discursive spaces and politics at the science–policy interface. Environmental Science & Policy30: 1–9.
86.
WitteKDSaalDS (2010)
Is a little sunshine all we need? On the impact of sunshine regulation on profits, productivity and prices in the Dutch drinking water sector. Journal of Regulatory Economics37(3): 219–242.
87.
WoodM (2016)
Politicisation, depoliticisation and anti-politics: Towards a multilevel research agenda. Political Studies Review14(4): 521–533.
