Turnaround of the Indian Railways: a public ownership saga

Gupta, Desh; Sathye, Milind

doi:10.1504/ijpp.2010.029783

Cited by 6 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some case studies define a programme's success according to the value judgements of the author being the standard. Others focus on standards such as goal achievement and benefits to key sectoral interests (see for example Schwartz 2006, Hulme 2007; Gupta and Saythe 2009).…”

Section: Why We Need a New Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy Success, Policy Failure and Grey Areas In-Between

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Policy protagonists are keen to claim that policy is successful while opponents are more likely to frame policies as failures. The reality is that policy outcomes are often somewhere in between these extremes. An added difficulty is that policy has multiple dimensions, often succeeding in some respects but not in others, according to facts and their interpretation. This paper sets out a framework designed to capture the bundles of outcomes that indicate how successful or unsuccessful a policy has been. It reviews existing literature on policy evaluation and improvement, public value, good practice, political strategy and policy failure and success in order to identify what can be built on and gaps that need to be filled. It conceives policy as having three realms: processes, programs and politics. Policies may succeed and/or fail in each of these and along a spectrum of success, resilient success, conflicted success, precarious success and failure. It concludes by examining contradictions between different forms of success, including what is known colloquially as good politics but bad policy.

show abstract

Section: Why We Need a New Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy Success, Policy Failure and Grey Areas In-Between

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To buttress the above point further, Gupta and Sathye (2008, p. 4) equally observed the Nellis study with the Indian Rail (IR) study and noted that -the key reason for the IR's financial performance decline was politicization of the decision-making processes that emphasized taking populist action over hard business decisions‖. The above observation by Gupta and Sathye (2008) is quite like the NRC's situation of which the result is the usual favorable response to the government funding initiatives with an increase in turnover through increased patronage by the helpless teaming population. However, the improved performance is usually not sustained because it was an ad hoc measure in the first place, which is rather political just to fulfil political manifestoes of the government of the day and never a business decision which as well is lacking both strategic or long-term views.…”

Section: Contingency Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Literature Review of Privatization Models, Theoretical Framework for Nigerian Railway Corporation Privatization

Abioye¹

2022

IJEF

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Privatization is the transfer of ownership from the state to the private sector. The main idea behind this economic strategy is to relieve government from the saddle of management of state enterprises that can be seen to be best managed by the private sector for maximum performance. The main method and critical choices for the privatization of the Nigerian Railway Corporation are management-buyout, concession, management contract, leases, share option and franchises. In addition, the research paper discusses the main performance indicators, such as effectiveness, efficiency, productivity, infrastructural investment, and profitability. These are the parameters set to measure the performance of privatized state enterprises after privatization discussed in the research study.

show abstract

“…For instance, some political actors may claim policies implemented by an opponent as failure while supporters may claim same policies as successful (Fischer, 2003). Policy failures and successes are well documented in a number of studies (see Southall, 2018;Howlett et al, 2015;Hindmoor & McConnell, 2013;McConnell, 2010;Gupta & Sathye, 2009;Handmer & Dovers, 2007;Pollack, 2007;Walsh, 2006 andDunleavy, 1995). McConnell (2010), however, argues that policy outcomes are usually in-between what opponents claim as failure and what protagonists claim as success.…”

Section: Brief Literature Review and Context Of The Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%