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

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Jae Bok Lee, David Shin
{"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":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"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\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2022.2101132\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2022.2101132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

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。
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
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