Unpacking New Public Management in Norway – A Policy Fields Approach

• In Event: Country studies on the impact of New Public Management on the third sector

Abstract

Norway has since the 1990s experienced the introduction of market emulating steering tools inspired by the New Public Management (NPM) agenda (Christensen & Lægreid, 2009). Until that point, the non-profit sector had enjoyed some form of autonomy while integrated as a natural service partner for the state (Eikås & Selle, 2002; Selle et al., 2018). Although management by objective had for some time given market incentives within the public organization, and thus also for the non-profit sector, it was with the exposure of competition with for-profit actors that the non-profits were forced to develop strategies to adapt to a new public sector governance regime (Loga, 2018).

Across service fields, non-profit service providers experienced these changes in different ways. In terms of market shares, experiences in different service areas ranged from close to extinction to considerable growth; in terms of protecting a civil society based form of operation, the experience ranged from legislated protection of their distinctiveness to becoming business like (Maier et al., 2016) or to align with the public sector funder (Marwell & Brown, 2020; Pfeifer & Salancik, 1978). Why did new public management reforms affect non-profit providers so differently across policy fields?

We apply the theoretical lenses of policy fields to demonstrate the distinct institutional context NPN reforms represented in each service area (Grønbjerg & Smith, 2021; Stone & Sandfort, 2009). Furthermore, based on non-profit theories and theories of resource dependence, we develop a typology of how the non-profits faced the new situation on two levels. 1) They developed operational strategies of a) market adaption where they compete with for-profits on equal terms (Smith & Lipsky, 2009), b) civil society insistence where they operated in line with fundamental values of their organizations and reject demands for market adaption (Battilana et al., 2015; Raeymaeckers & Cools, 2021), or c) obtained protection through integration in public services (Billis, 2010). 2) On the second level, non-profits developed advocacy strategies where they lobbied legislators to grant special protection from NPM instruments (Segaard, 2023).

Based on existing research and statistics we identify five policy fields with distinct trajectories of NPM-governance and non-profit responses: Early childhood education and care, the school sector, child protection services, asylum reception services, and in hospital services. Among these services, we analyze why some failed and some succeeded in lobbying for policy change in NPM-steering, the operational strategies of the non-profits, and the interaction between the two levels of non-profit strategies.

We conclude that even within one Scandinavian welfare state, NPM is a multifaceted phenomenon where general inferences on the relationship between NPM reforms and non-profit service provisions are unwarranted. Not only do the NPM-instruments vary, but they are also often layered unto the existing institutional structure in the policy field, making the preceding institutional set up important (Mahoney & Thelen, 2010). Furthermore, the non-profits have considerable agency, in terms of institutional resources and recognition of civil society value added, that they can use both to handle a new institutional framework and to influence the framework itself.

References

Battilana, J., Sengul, M., Pache, A.-C., & Model, J. (2015). Harnessing Productive Tensions in Hybrid Organizations: The Case of Work Integration Social Enterprises. Academy of Management Journal, 58(6), 1658-1685. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0903

Billis, D. (Ed.). (2010). Hybrid organizations and the third sector: Challenges for practice, theory and policy. Palgrave Macmillan.

Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2009). Transcending new public management–The increasing complexity of balancing control and autonomy. Journal of Public Administration, 2(1), 1-29.

Eikås, M., & Selle, P. (2002). A contract culture even in Scandinavia. In U. Ascoli & C. Ranci (Eds.), Dilemmas of the Welfare Mix. The New Structure of Welfare in an Era of Privatization. Kluwer Adademic/Plenum Publishers.

Grønbjerg, K. A., & Smith, S. R. (2021). The Changing Dynamic of Government–Nonprofit Relationships. Advancing the Field(s). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108761291

Loga, J. (2018). Civil society and the welfare state in Norway – historical relations and future roles. Community Development Journal, 53(3), 574-591. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsy027

Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (2010). A Theory of Gradual Institutional Change. In J. Mahoney & K. Thelen (Eds.), Explaning Institutional Change. Ambiguity, Agency, and Power. Cambridge University Press.

Maier, F., Meyer, M., & Steinbereithner, M. (2016). Nonprofit Organizations Becoming Business-Like:A Systematic Review. Nonprofit and voluntary sector quarterly, 45(1), 64-86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764014561796

Marwell, N. P., & Brown, M. (2020). Towards a Governance Framework for Government-Nonprofit Relations. In W. W. Powell & P. Bromley (Eds.), The Nonprofit Sector. A Reseacrh Handbook. Third Edition (pp. 231-250). Standford University Press.

Pfeifer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. Harper & Row.

Raeymaeckers, P., & Cools, P. (2021). Negotiating performance: the strategic responses of associations where people in poverty raise their voice. In K. LeRoux & N. S. Wright (Eds.), Performance and public value in the'hollow state': assessing government–nonprofit partnerships (pp. 102-124). Edward Elgar.

Segaard, S. B. (2023). Political changemakers in Norway: The strategies and political ideas of welfare providers. Acta Sociologica, 66(2), 136-152. https://doi.org/10.1177/00016993221088785

Selle, P., Strømsnes, K., & Loga, J. (2018). State and Civil Society: A Regime Change? In B. Enjolras & K. Strømsnes (Eds.), The Transformation of the Scandinavian Voluntary Sector (pp. 117-164). Springer.

Smith, S. R., & Lipsky, M. (2009). Nonprofits for hire: The welfare state in the age of contracting. Harvard University Press.

Stone, M. M., & Sandfort, J. R. (2009). Building a Policy Fields Framework to Inform Research on Nonprofit Organizations. Nonprofit and voluntary sector quarterly, 38(6), 1054-1075. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764008327198

Authors

• Håkon Solbu Trætteberg, Norwegian Institute for Social Research

• Karl Henrik Sivesind, Institute for Social Research