The literature on public management reform exhibits two intertwined convergence myths. First, a world‐wide consensus on a new public management (NPM) reform agenda is seen to exist amongst policy reformers and practitioners. If this agenda is not fully implemented in all cases, this is generally explained by political and reform setbacks rather than disagreement on policy aims. Second, this NPM agenda is now seen as challenged and even abandoned and replaced by an emergent post‐NPM or ‘public value leadership’ agenda and/or policy paradigm. We show the NPM convergence is overstated, with a remarkable resilience of existing institutions, and a diversity of public management systems. On the other hand, even within NPM exemplars that have putatively now adopted a post‐NPM agenda, there is debate to what degree NPM has been abandoned, and over the novelty, coherence and resilience of the post‐NPM agenda. Divergence and contextual variation prevail. The role of myth in policy reform is further examined.

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.Abstract This paper evaluates key developments in the social capital literature over the past decade. It then examines empirical work on the purported the link between social capital and economic performance. Although these results indicate that good governance and social cohesion make a measurable contribution to economic development, the offer little guidance for policy formulation. Early contributors to the social capital field were pessimistic about the ability of the state to stimulate social capital formation. More recently, there has been a groundswell of interest in the application of community development principles to foster social capital at the micro level. This paper incorporates a critical evaluation of the mainstream social capital literature from a social economics perspective. The various strands within the social economics tradition share a common concern with the "disembedding" of social context from mainstream economics.What is good, Phaedrus, and what is not good . . . need we ask anyone to tell us these things? (Pirsig, 1975).

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Local authorities vary considerably in their capacity for governance. The dimensions of this capacity can only be developed by drawing on local stocks of social capital. The seminal theories of social capital tend to conceive it as a community resource that is built up through a long tradition of civic engagement. We take issue with the laissez–faire implications of these theories, highlighting ways in which local governments can positively contribute to social capital formation by opening their ‘political opportunity structure’ and engaging voluntary organisations and community groups in trust–based partnership arrangements.

No abstract

No abstract