{"title":"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","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":"46 1","pages":"1 - 28"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"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\":\"46 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 28\"},\"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}","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}
How Policy Instruments Shape Recipients’ Evaluations of Service: The Case of Housing Policy for Military Personnel in Korea
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.
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.