LIST OF PANELS

Governing societal activities, institutions and work has always been ubiquitous but never self-explanatory. With respect to addressing global problems and pursuing important societal aims, such as combating climate change, easing up urban congestion, advancing welfare or providing education, it is difficult to disentangle public policies and agencies from private efforts, economic institutions and civic activities (Johanson and Vakkuri 2017; Pekkola, Pinheiro et al. 2022). Recent developments in commissioning public services, welfare mixes, corporate social responsibility and global rise in social enterprises signify the fluidity of institutional boundaries. Societies have learnt that both evolutionary adaptation and institutional design occur at multiple levels of society, which produces impacts undetected by our current policy instruments.

This panel “Public policies for hybrid governance”, investigates the dynamic and complex relationship, rationalities (implicit and/or explicit) and tensions and dilemmas among public, private and civic domains contributing to policy outcomes. A chief aim of this panel is to extend our understanding on governance by relating it with hybridity both as a form of governance (“hybrid governance”) and as an object of governance (“governance of hybridity”) and by connecting such an inquiry with policymaking of different contexts.  Governments have fundamental problems with understanding why, how and with what impacts this occurs. The problem is even more pronounced with the interplay between domains that we conceptualize as hybridity. By hybridity we refer to the interaction among public, private and civil society via distinct modes of ownership, parallel but often competing institutional logics, diverse funding bases and various forms of social and institutional control (Skelcher and Smith 2015; Grossi et al. 2017).

We propose three main questions for the panel:

1)     How are public policies influenced by hybridity and hybrid forms of governance?

2)     To what extent and via what mechanisms do governments influence (foster or hamper) hybridity?

3)     How does hybridity shape the agenda-setting, implementation and evaluation of public policies?

An interesting aspect is the extent to which hybridity shapes the design of governmental structures and arrangements. The policies of the nation states are often labeled as “public” primarily due to the dominant role of governments in instigating political agendas and social change in their territories. Therefore, it is also commonplace to understand the multiplicity of policy rationalities only via “public sector” outcomes. However, policies often include several aspects of public-private linkages and collaboration between governments and business corporations, as well as public-private-civil societal relationships (Erkkilä 2012). Our panel aims to bridge the gap between public policy and public administration scholars in discussing hybridity.

It has been assumed that mixing “public” and “private” creates contaminated institutions, and dysfunctional modes of organizations (Jacobs 1992; Ménard 2004). The side effects of specialization of scientific disciplines have contributed to the assumption of monstrous hybridity, which is assumed to compromise the neutrality of government (Vakkuri and Johanson, 2020). Accordingly, the governance solutions of societies have been based on a narrow understanding of institutional mixtures. Hybridity over time may have evolved both “by design” and “by default” (Johanson and Vakkuri 2017).

This panel invites both conceptual and empirical contributions that explore various facets of the policies on hybridity and hybridization of societies, in view of their implications on public policy analysis.

Many ideas of governance acknowledge the variety of public, private and community actors in policy networks, but the significance and implications of this diversity to either public policy or to participating actors has not attracted enough attention. This gives rise to a number of questions. 

Papers may address (among other possibilities) the following issues and questions:

What is the impact of public policies on hybridity? Do public policies increase hybrid forms of governance?
Empirical approaches to assessing the way in which policies approach hybridity: How is it different from governing public agencies or private enterprises? Are there differences in governing or regulating hybrids across policy fields?
A comparison of the perspectives on ‘hybrid governance’ vs. ‘governance of hybridity’ adopted by policy-relevant research and practical policy action: What new aspects does hybridity impose on the shaping of the agenda-setting and policy formation?
How do different types of hybrids (e.g. state-owned enterprises, social enterprises, universities) adapt to public policies? How do community self- and co-regulating practices in tandem with corporate social responsibility and entrepreneurial self-regulation influence public policies?
To what extent and through what mechanisms is hybridity linked to transnational governance and policy diffusion?

One of the objective of the panel is to present and continue our ongoing work on special issues e.g. in Australian Journal of Public Administration and in edited volume on the topic of Public policies for hybrid governance, (E.Elgar).