On the difficulties of addressing collective concerns through markets: from market devices to accountability devices

Neyland, Daniel; Ehrenstein, Véra; Milyaeva, Sveta

doi:10.1080/03085147.2019.1576432

Cited by 18 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This paradox has elsewhere been described as follows: 'if both actors expect success, the commissioner ought not to use a SIB, and if either commissioner or investor expects failure they should not get involved' (Giacomantonio 2017, p. 52). A SIB project would only make sense if the envisaged success rate of the intervention is relatively unclear to both parties, and if the commissioner is particularly risk averse or drawn to the idea of addressing collective concerns through non-governmental action (Neyland et al 2019).…”

Section: De-risking Governmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Governance of Social Risks: Nurturing Social Solidarity through Social Impact Bonds?

Guter-Sandu

2021

New Political Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite having been around for a decade now, Social Impact Bonds (SIBs) payment by result contracts funding social programmesare still a niche instrument. Constituting but a fraction of the overall impact investment sector, they were expected to grow much faster and augur a new model of pursuing social policy objectives. Whilst this has not yet occurred, they nevertheless continue to benefit from a great degree of political support and academic interest. But outside of the practitionerfocused literature, the scholarship investigating SIBs has largely identified financialisation and the erosion of social solidarity as the main dynamics underpinning this development. This article argues that it is important to also attend to SIBs as expressions of transformations occurring within the design and pursuit of social policy objectives. By looking at SIBs as a form of governance of social risks, the article argues that SIBs nurture their own forms of social solidarity. Based on three distinguishing tenets of SIBs, three types of solidarities are emphasised: inter-temporal, cross-sectoral and risk-insurance solidarities. Whilst these can spur social inclusion, innovation and collaboration, the article discusses how they can also be spurious and can come undone.

show abstract

Section: De-risking Governmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Governance of Social Risks: Nurturing Social Solidarity through Social Impact Bonds?

Guter-Sandu

2021

New Political Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the context of Market Practices, there are two other elements: Market Devices, which are objects that interfere in the construction of markets by making actors perform certain actions (Muniesa et al, 2007;Neyland, Ehrenstein, & Milyaeva, 2019); and Structuring Practices, which do not fit the categorization of Kjellberg and Helgesson (2007) but are relevant in maintaining the market structure now performed .…”

Section: Constructivist Market Studies (Cms)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Social-Environmental Certification in Coffee Production: The Making of a Sustainable Coffee Market

Souza

Leme

Guimarães

et al. 2021

RGSA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this research is to identify the transformations caused by the market practices conducted by UTZ in certified small coffee growers. For this, documentary research and semi-structured interviews were carried out with 13 certified growers of up to 50 hectares of area in a UTZ certification group coordinated by a private company, with technical assistance from a cooperative from Campos Gerais - MG. Content analysis was applied for processing obtained data. As a result, we identified that both the growers and the Management Unit of the certification that support them perform market and structuring practices, so that each one contributes to this market’s shaping. Observed inscription processes explain the transportation of market practices of the same nature between these actors, while structuring practices make these inscriptions visible in the context of analysis and catalyze the process of assimilation or dissociation from market practices. The results achieved in this research from the focus on inscriptions allowed an expansion of the theoretical model of the Constructivist Market Studies. It was also possible to demonstrate the Market Practices carried out by other authors of the Market Practices conducted by UTZ whose interactions were demonstrated through the Translation Chain and Inscription.

show abstract

“…Dix (2014Dix ( , 2016 shows how economic models were brought into an experiment carried out in the Netherlands to introduce performance-related pay for teachers. Neyland, Ehrenstein and Milyaeva (2019) studied a range of devices used to introduce selective features of markets into the treatment of electronic waste and social investment bonds for the protection of children at risk.…”

Section: Performing the Marketization Of The Nhsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whilst we support Frankel, Ossandón and Pallesen's (2019) call to study markets for collective concerns, we do not regard market features as a policy instrument in their own right. We suggest that policy instruments carry selected and adapted elements of markets to novel domains to ‘… programme the doing of a particular reality’ (Voß, 2016, p. 7), as illustrated by Dix (2014, 2016), Krafve (2014) and Neyland, Ehrenstein and Milyaeva (2019). Krafve (2014) shows how instruments – involving rules, financial reimbursement schemes and incentives – helped introduce a quasi‐market in the Swedish healthcare sector.…”

Section: Performing the Marketization Of The Nhsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing Marketization in Public Healthcare Systems: Performing Reform in the English National Health Service

Mason

Araújo²

2020

British J of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To implement marketization in public healthcare systems, policymakers need to situate abstract models of prescriptive practice in complex user settings. Using a performativity lens, we show how policy processes attempt to bring about the changes they presume. Investigating the implementation of the Health and Social Care Act 2012, and the development of policy instruments and 'Clinical Commissioning Groups', we explicate the performance of a marketization programme. Our longitudinal study of the interactions amongst the multiple constituencies the Act attempted to enrol, and the existing sociotechnical arrangements the Act aimed to change, generates three contributions: (1) we characterize the performativity of policy instruments as a process of bricolage that incorporates the principled attitude of making do on both sides -those who design the policy and those who are charged to implement it; (2) we identify the mechanisms through which the performativity of an envisioned model of marketization operates at multiple scales within a complex and highly distributed system of provision; and (3) we document and explicate why specific performances result in misfires and unintended outcomes. In short, we conceptualize policy performativity as a non-linear, dynamic process where theories and their effects are constantly being assessed, reconfigured and fed back into policymaking and implementation.

show abstract

On the difficulties of addressing collective concerns through markets: from market devices to accountability devices

Cited by 18 publications

References 27 publications

The Governance of Social Risks: Nurturing Social Solidarity through Social Impact Bonds?

The Governance of Social Risks: Nurturing Social Solidarity through Social Impact Bonds?

Social-Environmental Certification in Coffee Production: The Making of a Sustainable Coffee Market

Implementing Marketization in Public Healthcare Systems: Performing Reform in the English National Health Service

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About