POLYCENTRIC GOVERNANCE AND THE ROLE OF HYBRID ORGANIZATIONS
Keywords:
economic organizations, hierarchy, market, network, hybrid organizations, transaction costs, public benefit, discrete structural analysisAbstract
This study delves into the realm of economic organizations by exploring the dynamic relationship between hierarchy, market, and networks. It examines the contention that these three prototypes—hierarchy, market, and network—give rise to diverse organizational forms, including hybrid organizations. Drawing on seminal work by Williamson, Olson, Simon, and various scholars, this research aims to uncover the reasons for the coexistence of these organizational forms and their contribution to public benefit. It underscores that the amalgamation of hierarchy, market, and network features plays a pivotal role in shaping modern economic organizations. Additionally, this study advocates the utilization of discrete structural analysis to understand the intricate mechanisms behind the formation of diverse organizations and the relative advantages they offer in terms of transaction costs
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2023 Journal of Legal Studies, Humanities and Political Sciences (JLSHPS)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
References
Adler, P. S. (2001). Market, hierarchy, and trust: The knowledge economy and the future of capitalism.
Organization Science, 12,215-234.
Andrews, R., &Entwistle, T. (2010). Does cross-sectoral partnership deliver? An empirical exploration of public
service effectiveness, efficiency, and equity.Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,
,679-701.
Billis, D. (2010). Towards a theory of hybrid organizations. In Hybrid Organizations and the Third Sector:
Challenges for Practice, Theory and Policy, edited by D. Billis. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Blumenthal, D., &Hsiao, W.(2005). Privatization and its discontents: The evolving Chinese health care
system.New England Journal of Medicine, 353,1165-1170.
Brown, T. L., &Potoski, M.(2003). Transaction costs and institutional explanations for government service
production decisions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13,441-468.
Burns, L. R., &Pauly, M. V.(2002). Integrated delivery networks: A detour on the road to integrated health care?
Health Affairs, 21,128-143.
Calhoun, C.J. (2002). Classical Sociological Theory. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Carrin, G., Buse, K,Heggenhougen, K., &Quah, S. R.(2009).Health Systems Policy, Finance, and Organization.
Cambridge, MA: Academic Press.
Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Cheng, Y. (2019). Governing government-nonprofit partnerships: Linking governance mechanisms to
collaboration stages.Public Performance & Management Review, 42,190-212.
Coleman, J.S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Crumley, C. L. (1995). Heterarchy and the analysis of complex societies.Archaeological Papers of the American
Anthropological Association, 6, 1-5.
Cumming, G. S. (2016). Heterarchies: Reconciling networks and hierarchies.Trends in Ecology & Evolution,
,622-632.
Demil, B., &Lecocq, X. (2006). Neither market nor hierarchy nor network: The emergence of Bazaar
governance.Organization Studies, 27, 1447-1466.
Elazar, D. J. (1987). Exploring Federalism. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
Evans, P. (1995). Embedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation. Princeton: Princeton University
Press.
Evers, A. (2005). Mixed welfare systems and hybrid organizations: Changes in the governance and provision of
social services.International Journal of Public Administration, 28,737-748.
Fuchs, V. R. (2011). Who Shall Live? Health, Economics and Social Choice. Singapore: World Scientific.
Fukuyama, F.(1989). The end of history? The National Interest, 16,3-18.
Fung, A. Y. H., &Erni, J. N. (2013). Cultural clusters and cultural industries in China.Inter-Asia Cultural Studies,
,644-56.
Giddens, A. (2000). The Third Way and Its Critics. Oxford, UK: Policy Press.
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness.American Journal
of Sociology, 91,481-510.
Green, A. (2013). Education and State Formation: Europe, East Asia and the USA. New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Hooghe, L., &Marks, G. (2003). Unravelling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance.
American Political Science Review, 97,233-243.
Jessop, B. (2010). Hollowing out the ‗nation-state‘ and multi-level governance. In A Handbook of Comparative
Social Policy (second edition), edited by P. Kennett. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
Jones, C. (1997). A general theory of network governance: Exchange conditions and social mechanisms.Academy
of Management Review, 22,911-945.
Keast, R. L., Mandell, M., &Brown, K. A.(2006). Mixing state, market, and network governance modes: The role
of government in the ―crowded‖ policy domains.International Journal of Organization Theory and
Behavior, 9,27-50.
Kooiman, J., &Jentoft, S. (2009). Meta-governance: Values, norms and principles, and the making of hard
choices.Public Administration, 87,818-836.
Lewis, J. M. (2011). The future of network governance research: Strength in diversity and synthesis.Public
Administration, 89,1221-1234.
Lin, J. (1999). Social Transformation and Private Education in China. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger PublishersLindblom, C. E. (1977). Politics and Markets: The World’s Political-economic Systems. New York: Basic Books.
Mackerras, C. (1981). The Performing Arts in Contemporary China. London: Routledge.
Menard, C. (2004). The economics of hybrid organizations.Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics,
,1-32.
McBryde-Foster, M.,&Allen, T. (2005). The continuum of care: A concept development study.Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 506,624–32.
McCuloch, W. S. (1945). A heterarchy of values determined by the topology of nervous nets.Bulletin of
Mathematical Biophysics, 7, 89-93.
McGinnis, M. D., &Ostrom, E. (2011).Reflections on Vincent Ostrom, public administration, and
polycentricity.Public Administration Review, 72, 15-25.
Mcilroy, D. H. (2003). Subsidiarity and sphere sovereignty: Christian reflections on the size, shape and scope of
government.Journal of Church and State, 45,739-763.
Ngok, K. (2007). Chinese education policy in the context of decentralization and marketization: Evolution and
implications. Asian Pacific Education Review, 8,142-157.
Oakerson, R. J. (1999). Governing Local Public Economies: Creating the civic metropolis. San Francisco: ICS
Press.
Offer, J., &Pinker, R.(2016). Social Policy and Welfare pluralism: Selected Writings of Robert Pinker. Bristol,
UK: Policy Press.
Olson, M.(1965). The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
Osborne, S.P. (2006). The New Public Governance?Public Management Review, 8,377-387.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
——. 2010.Beyondmarkets and states: Polycentric governance of complex economic systems.American
Economic Review, 100,641-72.
Ostrom, V., &Ostrom, E. (1977).Public goods and public choices. In Alternatives for Delivering Public Services:
Toward Improved Performance, edited by E.S. Savas. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Ostrom, V. (2007). The Political Theory of a Compound Republic: Designing the American Experiment (third
edition). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Polanyi, K. (2001). The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time (second edition).
Lee‘s Summit, MO: Beacon Press.
Powell, W. W. (1987). Hybrid organizational arrangements: New form or transitional development?California
Management Review, 19,67-87.
Provan, K. G., &Kenis, P. (2007). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and
effectiveness.Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18,229-252.
Rodrigues, M., Tavares, A. F., &Araujo, J. F. (2012). Municipal service delivery: The role of transaction costs in
the choice between alternative governance mechanisms. Local Government Studies, 38,615-638.
Salamon, L. M. (1995). Partners inPublic Service: Government-nonprofit Relations in the Modern Welfare State.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press
Shepherd, W. G. (1990). The Economics of Industrial Organization. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Simon, H. (2009). An Empirically-based Microeconomics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tavares, A. F., &Camoes, P. J.(2007). Local service delivery choices in Portugal: A political transaction costs
framework.Local Government Studies, 33,535-553.
Van Til, K. A. (2008). Subsidiarity and sphere sovereignty: A match made in …?Theological tudies, 69,610-636.
Wang, H., Mu, R., &Liu, S. (2018). The effects of privatization on the equity of public services: Evidence from
China.Policy & Politics, 46,427-443.
Williamson, O. E. (1991). Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural
alternatives.Administrative Science Quarterly, 36,269-96.
(1996). TheMechanisms of Governance. New York: Oxford University Press.
The economics of governance.American Economic Review, 95,1-18.
Transaction cost economics: The natural progression. American Economic Review, 100,673-690.
Zhang, X. (2005). Coping with globalization through a collaborative federate mode of governance: The Case of
China in transition. Policy Studies, 26, 199-209.
(2016). Emerging polycentric pattern in governing transitional China. In Diversity of Managerial
Perspectives from inside China, edited by C. T. Foo. Singapore: Springer
