How Policy Instruments Shape Recipients’ Evaluations of Service: The Case of Housing Policy for Military Personnel in Korea

IF 2.2 3区管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Public Performance & Management Review Pub Date : 2022-07-26 DOI:10.1080/15309576.2022.2101132

Jae Bok Lee, David Shin

{"title":"How Policy Instruments Shape Recipients’ Evaluations of Service: The Case of Housing Policy for Military Personnel in Korea","authors":"Jae Bok Lee, David Shin","doi":"10.1080/15309576.2022.2101132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Many governments have implemented indirect policy instruments as an alternative to direct instruments for providing public services. However, the effectiveness of the instruments from the perspective of recipients has not yet been compared in depth in the literature. This study investigates the recipients’ evaluation of the differences between public housing and housing vouchers, which were exogenously assigned by the government to recipients, using ordered logit and generalized ordered logit models to analyze data collected in 2019 from Korean military personnel. The findings indicate that the evaluations of the services delivered by housing vouchers were more positive than those of public housing, and the magnitude of the difference between evaluations varied according to the attributes of the household decision makers and the rural or urban location of the leased house. These findings provide empirically grounded contributions to the selection of policy instruments and uncover the contexts in which each policy instrument may be implemented for the best effect.","PeriodicalId":47571,"journal":{"name":"Public Performance & Management Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Performance & Management Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2022.2101132","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract Many governments have implemented indirect policy instruments as an alternative to direct instruments for providing public services. However, the effectiveness of the instruments from the perspective of recipients has not yet been compared in depth in the literature. This study investigates the recipients’ evaluation of the differences between public housing and housing vouchers, which were exogenously assigned by the government to recipients, using ordered logit and generalized ordered logit models to analyze data collected in 2019 from Korean military personnel. The findings indicate that the evaluations of the services delivered by housing vouchers were more positive than those of public housing, and the magnitude of the difference between evaluations varied according to the attributes of the household decision makers and the rural or urban location of the leased house. These findings provide empirically grounded contributions to the selection of policy instruments and uncover the contexts in which each policy instrument may be implemented for the best effect.

查看原文本刊更多论文

政策工具如何影响接受者对服务的评价:以韩国军人住房政策为例

许多政府都采用间接政策工具来替代直接工具来提供公共服务。然而，从接受者的角度来看，这些工具的有效性尚未在文献中进行深入的比较。本研究利用有序logit和广义有序logit模型分析了2019年韩国军人收集的数据，调查了接受者对政府外生性分配给接受者的公共住房和住房券之间差异的评价。研究发现，居民对住房券所提供的服务的评价比公租房所提供的服务的评价更积极，且评价差异的大小因家庭决策者的属性和租赁房屋的城乡位置而异。这些发现为政策工具的选择提供了基于经验的贡献，并揭示了每种政策工具可能实现最佳效果的背景。

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

来源期刊

Public Performance & Management Review PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-

CiteScore

5.50

自引率

16.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： Public Performance & Management Review (PPMR) is a leading peer-reviewed academic journal that addresses a broad array of influential factors on the performance of public and nonprofit organizations. Its objectives are to: Advance theories on public governance, public management, and public performance; Facilitate the development of innovative techniques and to encourage a wider application of those already established; Stimulate research and critical thinking about the relationship between public and private management theories; Present integrated analyses of theories, concepts, strategies, and techniques dealing with performance, measurement, and related questions of organizational efficacy; and Provide a forum for practitioner-academic exchange. Continuing themes include, but are not limited to: managing for results, measuring and evaluating performance, designing accountability systems, improving budget strategies, managing human resources, building partnerships, facilitating citizen participation, applying new technologies, and improving public sector services and outcomes. Published since 1975, Public Performance & Management Review is a highly respected journal, receiving international ranking. Scholars and practitioners recognize it as a leading journal in the field of public administration.