Agency control or autonomy? Government steering of Swedish government agencies 2003–2017

Abstract

A central claim of the NPM doctrine is that public sector organizations will deliver better quality and improve efficiency if managers are given more autonomy in managerial and operational decisions. At the same time the idea is to keep managers under close control, which has led to the introduction of result-control instruments. This balancing strategy is referred to as the paradox of autonomization. There is, however, still scarce knowledge on whether and how the proposed balancing techniques work. Using a unique database on Swedish government agencies this article aims to mitigate this deficiency (N ¼ 1752). A balancing strategy is mainly confirmed, since higher managerial and structural autonomy are balanced with more external results control by government. We show that governments' attempts at more managerial approaches to public service provision in reality add new ex post controls without reducing the old ones. However, policy and financial autonomy are not balanced by increased results controlthese dimensions diminish when controlling for budget size. This study is an answer to a general call for more objective measures for evaluating bureaucratic autonomy.

Social Distancing Policies in the Coronavirus Battle: A Comparison of Denmark and Sweden

“…Finally, not even the government as a whole can issue orders or advice to authorities concerning their application of general rules to individual cases; in other words, by constitutional fiat it is not allowed to interfere in cases of individual decision-making by authorities. Together, these three features constitute the gist of the independence of Swedish public authorities [27][28][29].…”

Room for space in agencification reforms: A tale of three Italian museums

“…Autonomy is thus a constitutive component of agencification, and it is not surprising that much research has focused on theoretical discussion (Ahlbäck Öberg & Wockelberg, 2021). Some consensus has grown around a conceptual distinction between two dimensions of autonomy (Verhoest et al, 2004).…”

The challenges facing evidence-based decision making in the initial response to COVID-19

“…Contrary to many other countries where central agencies are under ministerial responsibility, the administrative system in Sweden guarantees that the central agencies enjoy a high degree of quasi-decisional autonomy [52,53]. Sweden's constitution guarantees the independence of the central government administration, which means 'that steering government agencies in particular cases when exercising public authority is not allowed' [54]. This ensures strong policymaking influence for technical knowledge and isolates decision-making processes from volatilities of public and political pressure.…”