This article draws on neo-institutional theoretical ideas to empirically examine the institutionalization of evaluation in the national government of Finland. The results indicate ambiguity in the basic institutionalization of Finnish evaluation, and imprecision in the agency of the actors that carry out or commission evaluations or utilize the evaluation results. Some Finnish institutional practices of evaluation enhance formal rationality such as efficiency and effectiveness, some support legitimation, and others do both in combination. The strength of coupling of evaluation to decision-making varies greatly. For future research, the article suggests studies on the institutionalization of evaluation in other countries. For evaluation practice, the results highlight the position of evaluation along the rationality-legitimation axis, and the variable linkages of evaluation to decision-making.

No abstract

It is often claimed that computational methods for examining textual data give good enough party position estimates at a fraction of the costs of many non-computational methods. However, the conclusive testing of these claims is still far from fully accomplished. We compare the performance of two computational methods, Wordscores and Wordfish, and four non-computational methods in estimating the political positions of parties in two dimensions, a left-right dimension and a progressive-conservative dimension. Our data comprise electoral party manifestos written in Finnish and published in Finland. The non-computational estimates are composed of the Chapel Hill Expert Survey estimates, the Manifesto Project estimates, estimates deriving from survey-based data on voter perceptions of party positions, and estimates derived from electoral candidates’ replies to voting advice application questions. Unlike Wordfish, Wordscores generates relatively well-performing estimates for many of the party positions, but despite this does not offer an even match to the non-computational methods.

We expect Big Data methods to contribute to research with results that are not inferior to those attained in other ways but possibly better, or hard or impossible to generate in other ways. Those who apply these methods may also aspire to augment the arsenal of research methods, offer surrogates for existing research designs, and re-orient research. Moreover, we can critically examine the institutional, societal and political effects of the Big Data methods and the conditions for the solid institutionalization of these methods in social and political research. To reach its primary objective, this article elaborates conclusions on how Big Data methods, not only by means of their 'social life' but also by their 'political life', may influence the institutionalization of social and political research. To reach its secondary objective, the article re-examines a study of budgetary legislation in 13 countries carried out by means of Big Data methods to draw conclusions concerning the augmentation of the arsenal of research methods, the surrogation of existing research designs, and the re-orientation of research.

The purpose of this paper is to examine conceptual changes of government accounting in Finland in 1980-2009 with certain comparisons to the UK, Italy and Austria. The analysis applies 'public administration', 'new public management' (NPM) and 'public governance' as 'umbrella concepts' for examining government accounting. The results indicate Finland as a vigorous reformer although more reluctant to explain its reforms in NPM terms than the comparison countries. The ultimate conclusions of the paper outline for the examination of government accounting for the better acknowledgement of the political and ideological aspects of its conceptual changes.