Does a Payment-for-Outcomes Model Improve Indigenous Wellbeing? Commissioning Agencies and Social Impact Bonds in New Zealand

Pub Date : 2020-12-15 DOI:10.18584/iipj.2020.11.4.8195
L. Humpage
{"title":"Does a Payment-for-Outcomes Model Improve Indigenous Wellbeing? Commissioning Agencies and Social Impact Bonds in New Zealand","authors":"L. Humpage","doi":"10.18584/iipj.2020.11.4.8195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Commissioning agencies and social impact bonds are two examples of New Zealand’s shift towards payment-for-outcomes funding mechanisms over the last decade, as the government attempted to improve both policy innovation and social outcomes. This article highlights that although the commissioning agencies have been more successful than social impact bonds, neither has completely achieved these goals of innovation and improved outcomes. This is particularly concerning given Indigenous Māori are disproportionately impacted by both policies. Discussion concludes by highlighting some of the problems associated with applying a payment-for-outcomes model to Indigenous Peoples, given these funding mechanisms are becoming increasingly popular in other settler nation states.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18584/iipj.2020.11.4.8195","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Commissioning agencies and social impact bonds are two examples of New Zealand’s shift towards payment-for-outcomes funding mechanisms over the last decade, as the government attempted to improve both policy innovation and social outcomes. This article highlights that although the commissioning agencies have been more successful than social impact bonds, neither has completely achieved these goals of innovation and improved outcomes. This is particularly concerning given Indigenous Māori are disproportionately impacted by both policies. Discussion concludes by highlighting some of the problems associated with applying a payment-for-outcomes model to Indigenous Peoples, given these funding mechanisms are becoming increasingly popular in other settler nation states.
分享
查看原文
按结果付费模式能改善土著居民的福祉吗?新西兰的委托机构和社会影响债券
委托机构和社会影响债券是新西兰在过去十年中转向成果支付融资机制的两个例子,因为政府试图改善政策创新和社会成果。本文强调,尽管委托机构比社会影响债券更成功,但两者都没有完全实现创新和改善成果的目标。这尤其令人担忧,因为土著毛利人受到这两项政策的不成比例的影响。讨论最后强调了对土著人民应用成果付费模式的一些问题,因为这些资助机制在其他定居者民族国家越来越受欢迎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信