Quantifying Creative Destruction Entrepreneurship and Productivity in New Zealand

This paper (a) provides a framework for quantifying any economy's flexibility, and (b) reviews the evidence on New Zealand firms' birth, growth and death. The data indicate that, by and large, the labour market and the financial market are doing their job.

Open public sector information: from principles to practice

Accessible information is the lifeblood of a robust democracy and a productive economy. As part of a worldwide movement, the Australian Government is fundamentally changing the way that information is valued, managed, used and shared with others. The concept that best captures this trend, both in Australia and internationally, is the term \u27public sector information\u27 (PSI). This describes data, information or content that is generated, collected, or funded by or for the government or public institutions. PSI is a valuable resource that underpins all the essential public functions that government discharges. It can be an equally valuable resource outside government. People and business can use PSI to evaluate, respond, research, plan, discover, invent, innovate and aspire. The true value of information is realised only when others can use and build upon it to create new ideas, inventions and strategies. Open PSI is the necessary policy setting to make that happen. It requires, in essence, that government information and data is managed in a way that makes it readily discoverable, accessible and reusable by business and the community. This report details the results of a survey conducted by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) on how 191 Australian Government agencies manage PSI. The survey was structured around the eight Principles on open public sector information (Open PSI principles) that were published by the OAIC in 2011. The key finding of this report is that Australian Government agencies are actively embracing an open access and proactive disclosure culture. The high response rate to this survey confirms that finding. The widespread and growing use of digital and web technologies to support a PSI transformation is another sign. There are nevertheless many policy challenges and practical obstacles that must be tackled. It is more a time of transition than fulfilment. This transition – or cultural shift – is more successful when built on four elements: agency leadership, officer innovation, community engagement and investment in information infrastructure. Those four elements were identified by agencies themselves as key issues in developing national information policy. Shortcomings in existing policies, structure and information management practices are highlighted by the survey responses: Transitioning to open access and proactive publication requires cultural change, including more active sponsorship of this philosophy by agency leaders; this is particularly important to overcome resistance or disengagement within agencies. Existing systems for record keeping, information governance, information release and user consultation are not suitably designed for the new era of open PSI, in which government information and data must be valued as a core agency asset and a national resource. Information management systems do not always apply uniformly across agencies; from an open PSI perspective there can be indefensible differences in information management practices across agency branches and locations. A great deal of valuable information is held by agencies in legacy documents that must be reformatted for digital publication; this can be a costly and technologically challenging process. Not all agencies have the technical specialisation and capacity to implement open PSI, on issues such as attachment of metadata, conformance to WCAG 2.0 and data release in an open and standards-based format. The default position of open access licensing is not clearly or robustly stated, nor properly reflected in the practice of government agencies. Agencies have been successful in identifying information that is required to be published under the Information Publication Scheme, but have not been as successful in identifying or prioritising other information that can be published through the agency website or on open data portals. Budgetary limitations hamper the capacity of agencies to be more dynamic in implementing an open PSI culture. An open PSI access strategy is vital to enable Australia to fully enjoy the economic, regulatory and cultural benefits of an open government model. Great strides to unlock PSI assets have recently been taken through the combined impact of the Government\u27s Gov 2.0 strategy, freedom of information changes, the innovation agenda, a shift in public service culture, and service delivery reform

Is Co-Production Possible? Tensions and Opportunities in the Relationship Between Public Sector Practitioners and Academic Providers

The paper explores some of the tensions and dilemmas in the relationship between public sector organisations and academic providers of training and consultancy. Developing the analysis offered by the authors at IRSPM XV, Dublin (Fenwick and McMillan, 2011) the paper considers critical factors in the relationship between client (public organisation) and contractor (higher education provider). This includes specific instances of collaboration, obtained from interviews with HE providers. These illuminate the crucial area of ‘co-production’ of knowledge and learning. It is our proposition that the rhetoric of co-production may bolster the aims of those in the organisation who seek to implement their own agendas for change, or the organisational need of academic providers to achieve their own internal goals, such as financial targets. The instrumental objectives of each party may be addressed through a language of co-production. We do not suggest that the public organisation-HEI relationship thus conceived necessarily generates negative outcomes. On the contrary, there is no doubt that tangible benefits (for both parties) may be produced by such collaborative programmes. But this is not our focus. Our aim is to illuminate the processes that are going on within this, that is, to deconstruct the meaning and practice of co-production and to identify its constituent elements and consequences at a time of unprecedented uncertainty for the public sector

Making Sense of Public Policy in a Fragmented World: the Search for Solutions and the Limits of Learning

This paper explores innovation, learning and change in an environment where the historical moment of ‘New Public Management’ (NPM) has given way to unprecedented fluidity in public policy and decision making. To begin, we examine key elements of the post-NPM environment, where foundational approaches (in theory and practice) can be challenged either by innovation or by default to previous positions: both trends are evident in the incoherence of policy responses to the global economic crisis. We then consider the search for meaning and sense-making by policy actors who seek new solutions to cope with intractable problems. This can generate innovative responses, including the growth of Third Sector (voluntary organisation) involvement in public policy and public services, or the rediscovery of a public service ethic amidst the banking crisis, including citizen withdrawal from multi-national banks in favour of ethical or mutual providers. We will then suggest that although there is a certain inevitability to the process of change in an era which has moved beyond modernist and foundationalist solutions, this does not necessarily generate positive and desirable innovation. Change may instead involve a retreat to failed responses of a previous era. It is as though a familiar script is still recited by policy actors even though the overall storyline has fundamentally changed. In this sense, entrenched learning may produce negative results even though ‘reverse organisational learning’ (ie organisational amnesia) may accord a superficial appearance of novelty. This may be readily illustrated by examples from recent European public policy. Finally, in an era where the modernist conception of gradual mastery (of the world, and of theory) has fallen away, the discussion considers the kind of analytical tools that may assist in the theoretical understanding of a changed public policy environment

Why be Moral in a Virtual World

This article considers two related and fundamental issues about morality in a virtual world. The first is whether the anonymity that is a feature of virtual worlds can shed light upon whether people are moral when they can act with impunity. The second issue is whether there are any moral obligations in a virtual world and if so what they might be. Our reasons for being good are fundamental to understanding what it is that makes us moral or indeed whether any of us truly are moral. Plato grapples with this problem in book two of The Republic where Socrates is challenged by his brothers Adeimantus and Glaucon. They argue that people are moral only because of the costs to them of being immoral; the external constraints of morality. Glaucon asks us to imagine a magical ring that enables its wearers to become invisible and capable of acting anonymously. The ring is in some respects analogous to the possibilities created by online virtual worlds such as Second Life, so the dialogue is our entry point into considering morality within these worlds. These worlds are three dimensional user created environments where people control avatars and live virtual lives. As well as being an important social phenomenon, virtual worlds and what people chose to do in them can shed light on what people will do when they can act without fear of normal sanction. This paper begins by explaining the traditional challenge to morality posed by Plato, relating this to conduct in virtual worlds. Then the paper will consider the following skeptical objection. A precondition of all moral requirements is the ability to act. There are no moral requirements in virtual worlds because they are virtual and it is impossible to act in a virtual world. Because avatars do not have real bodies and the persons controlling avatars are not truly embodied, it is impossible for people to truly act in a virtual world. We will show that it is possible to perform some actions and suggest a number of moral requirements that might plausibly be thought to result. Because avatars cannot feel physical pain or pleasure these moral requirements are interestingly different from those of real life. Hume’s arguments for why we should be moral apply to virtual worlds and we conclude by considering how this explains why morality exists in these environments