Autonomy and Reregulation: Explaining Dynamics in the Flemish Social Housing Sector

Abstract

The autonomy of implementing agencies often seems to trigger reregulation of those agencies. Reregulation has two dimensions: the layering of different control mechanisms and the growth of the rules within those layers. Using a case study of social housing in Belgium, we explain the tendency to reregulate once autonomy is provided. We attribute the layering of rules to a conflict regarding oversight between the established legal profession and an ascending management profession. Crozier's vicious circle of bureaucratization helps to explain the growth of regulation within layers. The legal culture of the Rechtsstaat is a catalyst for both professional competition and bureaucratization.

Role of Impact Assessment in Sustainable Development

“…These principles from the perspective of the normative character are imposed by appropriate legal decisions of creators of policies, as well as the court jurisdiction [35]. J. Bengoextea, in the classification of the principles constituting the European Union law, distinguished as the last ones such principles, which allow it to measure up to the arising new social problems among which, next to such notions as subsidiarity, environmental protection, proportionality, a principle of sustainable development appears [36] (p. [100][101][102][103][104][105][106][107][108][109][110]. It is worth noting, though, that in this division the principles and values have been combined [35] (p. 106), [37] (p. 29).…”

Understanding Social Impact and Value Creation in Hybrid Organizations: The Case of Italian Civil Service

“…Performance represents a complex concept to define, especially for what concerns hybrid organizations. While for-profit organizations measure it in terms of outputs-taking into account their effectiveness, efficiency, and productiveness-for non-profits it is harder to quantify goals, since they operate in less competitive environments which makes benchmarking more difficult [104,105].…”

“Making-Up during Data Analysis” the Performance Measurement System in Karnataka

“…It is conceptualized as a technical tool that evaluates public sector performance (Van Dooren et al, 2015) as well as a rationalized governance tool (Myonihan, 2009). Performance measurement has been identified to be used in more than 40 different ways (Van Dooren, 2006). However, the real purpose remains to improve performance (Behn, 2003).…”