Juggling Inputs, Outputs, and Outcomes in the Search for Policy Competence: Recent Experience in Australia

During the mid- to late 1980s, the Labor government in Australia under Prime Minister Bob Hawke distinguished itself by achieving a balance in its budgeting and management approaches. This allowed for focusing on inputs, outputs, and outcomes in tandem. The approach differed considerably from that pursued in New Zealand. There, an overemphasis on outputs introduced serious distortions to the relations between ministers and officials, which reformers in Wellington have subsequently taken strides toward correcting.
As often happens with reform movements, the Australian process reached a plateau by the early to mid-1990s. Broadly, officials welcomed a change of government in 1996 with the expectation that the coalition under Prime Minister John Howard would give new impetus to innovative public management. Ironically, this coalition addressed the issues surrounding budgeting and management reform through an unreconstructed 1980s lens, highlighting outputs at the expense of balanced emphasis of inputs and outcomes as well. As suggested by the Labor government's success in the 1980s and the adjustments attempted by New Zealand governments in the 1990s, collective dynamics among and between members of cabinet and officials, respectively, are key to a balanced approach. These dynamics foster a sense of trusteeship whereby participants see that inputs, outputs, and outcomes form part of a seamless web centered on public interest. The analysis of the Coalition's performance so far suggests thhat its efforts at reform have proven retrogressive when evaluated by this standard.     

Electoral bias at the 2015 general election: reducing Labour’s electoral advantage

Electoral bias results in an asymmetrical seat distribution between parties with similar vote shares. Over recent British general elections Labour held an advantage because it efficiently converted votes into seats. Following the 2015 election result this advantage has reduced considerably, principally because Labour’s vote distribution saw it accumulate more ineffective votes, particularly where electoral support was not converted into seats. By contrast, the vote distribution of the Conservative party is now superior to that of Labour because it acquired fewer wasted votes although Labour retains a modest advantage overall because it benefits from inequalities in electorate size and differences in voter turnout. Features of the 2015 election, however, raise general methodological challenges for decomposing electoral bias. The analysis, therefore, considers the effect of substituting the Liberal Democrats as the third party with the United Kingdom Independence Party. It also examines the outcome in Scotland separately from that in England and Wales. Following this analysis it becomes clear that the method for decomposing electoral bias requires clearer guidelines for its application in specific settings.     

Peer effects in private and public schools across countries

Many argue that the composition of a school or classroom‐that is, the characteristics of the students themselves‐affect the educational attainment of an individual student. This influence of the students in a classroom is often referred to as a peer effect. There have been few systematic studies that empirically examine the peer effect in the educational process. In this research, we examine the peer effect with a unique data set that includes individual student achievement scores and comprehensive characteristics of the students' families, teachers, other school characteristics, and peers for five countries. The data allow an examination of peer effects in both private and public schools in all countries. Our analysis indicates that peer effects are a significant determinant of educational achievement; the effects of peers appear to be greater for low‐ability students than for high‐ability students. The finding is robust across countries but not robust across school type. © 2000 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.