Bibliography for L34544, L34561 & L34678. Public management and governance BETA

1

Ashworth R, Ferlie E, Hammerschmid G, et al. Theorizing Contemporary Public Management: International and Comparative Perspectives. British Journal of Management. 2013;24:S1–17. doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.12035

2

Bevir M, Rhodes RAW. Searching for civil society: changing patterns of governance in Britain. Public Administration. 2003;81:41–62. doi: 10.1111/1467-9299.00336

3

Bevir M, Rhodes RAW, Weller P. Traditions of governance: interpreting the changing role of the public sector. Public Administration. 2003;81:1–17. doi: 10.1111/1467-9299.00334

4

Brandsen T, Kim S. Contextualizing the meaning of public management reforms: a comparison of the Netherlands and South Korea. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2010;76:367–86. doi: 10.1177/0020852309365671

5

Chandler J, Barry J, Clark H. Stressing Academe: The Wear and Tear of the New Public Management. Human Relations. 2002;55:1051–69. doi: 10.1177/0018726702055009019

6

Considine M, Lewis JM. Bureaucracy, Network, or Enterprise? Comparing Models of Governance in Australia, Britain, the Netherlands, and New Zealand. Public Administration Review. 2003;63:131–40. doi: 10.1111/1540-6210.00274

7

Dunleavy P. New Public Management Is Dead--Long Live Digital-Era Governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 2005;16:467–94. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mui057

8

Ferlie E, Hartley J, Martin S. Changing Public Service Organizations: Current Perspectives and Future Prospects. British Journal of Management. 2003;14:S1–14. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2003.00389.x

9

Hajer M. Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void. Policy Sciences. 2003;36:175–95. doi: 10.1023/A:1024834510939

10

HOOD C. Intellectual Obsolescence and Intellectual Makeovers: Reflections on the Tools of Government after Two Decades. Governance. 2007;20:127–44. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0491.2007.00347.x

11

HOOD C, DIXON R. A MODEL OF COST-CUTTING IN GOVERNMENT? THE GREAT MANAGEMENT REVOLUTION IN UK CENTRAL GOVERNMENT RECONSIDERED. Public Administration. 2013;91:114–34. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2012.02072.x

12

Hood C. The Middle Aging of New Public Management: Into the Age of Paradox? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 2004;14:267–82. doi: 10.1093/jopart/muh019

13

Jones BD. Bounded Rationality and Political Science: Lessons from Public Administration and Public Policy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 2003;13:395–412. doi: 10.1093/jpart/mug028

14

Kickert WJM. Beneath consensual corporatism: traditions of governance in the Netherlands. Public Administration. 2003;81:119–40. doi: 10.1111/1467-9299.00339

15

LE GRAND J. Knights, Knaves or Pawns? Human Behaviour and Social Policy. Journal of Social Policy. 1997;26:149–69. doi: 10.1017/S0047279497004984

16

Lynn Jr. LE. The Myth of the Bureaucratic Paradigm: What Traditional Public Administration Really Stood For. Public Administration Review. 2001;61:144–60. doi: 10.1111/0033-3352.00016

17

Martin S. The Modernization of UK Local Government: Markets, Managers, Monitors and Mixed Fortunes. Public Management Review. 2002;4:291–307. doi: 10.1080/14616670210151595

18

Rhodes RAW. The New Governance: Governing without Government. Political Studies. 1996;44:652–67. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb01747.x

19

Rhodes RAW. Understanding Governance: Ten Years On. Organization Studies. 2007;28:1243–64. doi: 10.1177/0170840607076586

20

Skelcher C. Changing images of the State: overloaded, hollowed-out, congested. Public Policy and Administration. 2000;15:3–19. doi: 10.1177/095207670001500302

21

Stewart J, Walsh K. Change in the management of public services. Public administration. 1992;70:499–518.

22

Zafirovski M. Administration and Society: Beyond Public Choice? Public Administration. 2001;79:665–88. doi: 10.1111/1467-9299.00274

23

Bryson JM. What to do when Stakeholders matter. Public Management Review. 2004;6:21–53. doi: 10.1080/14719030410001675722

24

Hajer M, Versteeg W. performing governance through networks. European Political Science. 2005;4:340–7. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210034

25

Hartley J, Sørensen E, Torfing J. Collaborative Innovation: A Viable Alternative to Market Competition and Organizational Entrepreneurship. Public Administration Review. 2013;73:821–30. doi: 10.1111/puar.12136

26

Klijn E. designing and managing networks: possibilities and limitations for network management. European Political Science. 2005;4:328–39. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210035

27

KLIJN E-H, SKELCHER C. DEMOCRACY AND GOVERNANCE NETWORKS: COMPATIBLE OR NOT? Public Administration. 2007;85:587–608. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00662.x

28

Papadopoulos Y. taking stock of multi-level governance networks. European Political Science. 2005;4:316–27. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210032

29

Skelcher C, Mathur N, Smith M. The Public Governance of Collaborative Spaces: Discourse, Design and Democracy. Public Administration. 2005;83:573–96. doi: 10.1111/j.0033-3298.2005.00463.x

30

Smith M, Beazley M. Progressive Regimes, Partnerships and the Involvement of Local Communities: A Framework for Evaluation. Public Administration. 2000;78:855–78. doi: 10.1111/1467-9299.00234

31

Sørensen E. the democratic problems and potentials of network governance. European Political Science. 2005;4:348–57. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210033

32

Stoker G. Public Value Management: A New Narrative for Networked Governance? The American Review of Public Administration. 2006;36:41–57. doi: 10.1177/0275074005282583

33

STOKER G. WAS LOCAL GOVERNANCE SUCH A GOOD IDEA? A GLOBAL COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE. Public Administration. 2011;89:15–31. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01900.x

34

Torfing J. symposium: governance networks. European Political Science. 2005;4:301–4. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210030

35

Torfing J. governance network theory: towards a second generation. European Political Science. 2005;4:305–15. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210031

36

WEST K, DAVIS P. WHAT IS THE PUBLIC VALUE OF GOVERNMENT ACTION? TOWARDS A (NEW) PRAGMATIC APPROACH TO VALUES QUESTIONS IN PUBLIC ENDEAVOURS. Public Administration. 2011;89:226–41. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2010.01847.x

37

Skelcher C. Changing images of the State: overloaded, hollowed-out, congested. Public Policy and Administration. 2000;15:3–19. doi: 10.1177/095207670001500302

38

Adsera A. Are You Being Served? Political Accountability and Quality of Government. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization. 2003;19:445–90. doi: 10.1093/jleo/ewg017

39

Bawn K, Rosenbluth F. Short versus Long Coalitions: Electoral Accountability and the Size of the Public Sector. American Journal of Political Science. 2006;50:251–65. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00182.x

40

Chapman R, Lowndes V. Accountable, authorized or authentic? What do ‘faith representatives’ offer urban governance? Public Money & Management. 2009;29:371–8. doi: 10.1080/09540960903378233

41

Christensen M, Skærbæk P. Framing and overflowing of public sector accountability innovations. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 2007;20:101–32. doi: 10.1108/09513570710731227

42

Considine M. The End of the Line? Accountable Governance in the Age of Networks, Partnerships, and Joined-Up Services. Governance. 2002;15:21–40. doi: 10.1111/1468-0491.00178

43

Cunningham GM, Harris JE. Toward a Theory of Performance Reporting to Achieve Public Sector Accountability: A Field Study. Public Budgeting <html_ent glyph="@amp;" ascii="&"/> Finance. 2005;25:15–42. doi: 10.1111/j.0275-1100.2005.00359.x

44

Dereli C. Smoke and mirrors and performance management. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2011;24:42–56. doi: 10.1108/09513551111099217

45

Flinders M. Daring to be a Daniel: The Pathology of Politicized Accountability in a Monitory Democracy. Administration & Society. 2011;43:595–619. doi: 10.1177/0095399711403899

46

Glynn JJ, Murphy MP. Public management. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 1996;9:125–37. doi: 10.1108/09513559610146492

47

Heinrich CJ. Outcomes-Based Performance Management in the Public Sector: Implications for Government Accountability and Effectiveness. Public Administration Review. 2002;62:712–25. doi: 10.1111/1540-6210.00253

48

Monfardini P. Accountability in the new public sector: a comparative case study. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2010;23:632–46. doi: 10.1108/09513551011078897

49

Mulgan R. ‘Accountability’: An Ever-Expanding Concept? Public Administration. 2000;78:555–73. doi: 10.1111/1467-9299.00218

50

Papenfuss U, Schaefer C. Improving public accountability by aligning reporting to organizational changes in public service provision - an empirical Internet study of all Austrian, German and Swiss towns and states from an agency-theory perspective. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2010;76:555–76. doi: 10.1177/0020852310372451

51

Ryan C, Walsh P. Collaboration of public sector agencies: reporting and accountability challenges. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2004;17:621–31. doi: 10.1108/09513550410562284

52

Shaoul J. ‘Sharing’ political authority with finance capital: The case of Britain’s Public Private Partnerships. Policy and Society. 2011;30:209–20. doi: 10.1016/j.polsoc.2011.07.005

53

Tetlock PE. Vying for Rhetorical High Ground in Accountability Debates: It Is Easy to Look Down on Those Who Look Soft on. Administration & Society. 2011;43:693–703. doi: 10.1177/0095399711426848

54

Willems T, Van Dooren W. Lost in diffusion? How collaborative arrangements lead to an accountability paradox. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2011;77:505–30. doi: 10.1177/0020852311408648

55

Sørensen E. the democratic problems and potentials of network governance. European Political Science. 2005;4:348–57. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210033

56

Berg AM. Transforming public services – transforming the public servant? International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2006;19:556–68. doi: 10.1108/09513550610686627

57

BATTEN E, CORREIA L, HEDGES H, et al. EXPERTISE AND POLICY-MAKING: LEGAL PROFESSIONALS IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT. Public Administration. 2006;84:771–81. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00611.x

58

Burgess S. The Role of Incentives in the Public Sector: Issues and Evidence. Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 2003;19:285–300. doi: 10.1093/oxrep/19.2.285

59

Carboni N. Changing relationships between politicians and bureaucrats in contemporary democracies: an empirical analysis of the Italian experience. International public management review. 2010;11:90–109.

60

Farrell C, Morris J. The `Neo-Bureaucratic’ State: Professionals, Managers and Professional Managers in Schools, General Practices and Social Work. Organization. 2003;10:129–56. doi: 10.1177/1350508403010001380

61

Fitzgerald L, Ferlie E. Professionals: Back to the Future? Human Relations. 2000;53:713–39. doi: 10.1177/0018726700535005

62

Greener I. Understanding NHS Reform: The Policy-Transfer, Social Learning, and Path-Dependency Perspectives. Governance. 2002;15:161–83. doi: 10.1111/1468-0491.00184

63

Horner L, Lekhi R, Blaug R. Deliberative democracy and the role of public managers. 2006.

64

HOWLETT M, WELLSTEAD AM. Policy Analysts in the Bureaucracy Revisited: The Nature of Professional Policy Work in Contemporary Government. Politics & Policy. 2011;39:613–33. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-1346.2011.00306.x

65

Kearney, Richard C. Professionalism and Bureaucratic Responsiveness: Conflict or Compatibility? Public Administration Review. 1988;48.

66

Kirkpatrick I, Jespersen PK, Dent M, et al. Medicine and management in a comparative perspective: the case of Denmark and England. Sociology of Health & Illness. 2009;31:642–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2009.01157.x

67

Parsons W. Modernising Policy-making for the Twenty First Century: The Professional Model. Public Policy and Administration. 2001;16:93–110. doi: 10.1177/095207670101600307

68

Pedersen D, Hartley J. The changing context of public leadership and management. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2008;21:327–39. doi: 10.1108/09513550810880214

69

Probst HB, Hussain ZB, Andersen O. Cancer patient pathways in Denmark as a joint effort between bureau... - PubMed - NCBI. 2011.

70

Sehested K. HOW NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT REFORMS CHALLENGE THE ROLES OF PROFESSIONALS. International Journal of Public Administration. 2002;25:1513–37. doi: 10.1081/PAD-120014259

71

Taylor I, Kelly J. Professionals, discretion and public sector reform in the UK: re‐visiting Lipsky. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2006;19:629–42. doi: 10.1108/09513550610704662

72

Tummers L. Explaining the willingness of public professionals to implement new policies: a policy alienation framework. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2011;77:555–81. doi: 10.1177/0020852311407364

73

Considine M. The End of the Line? Accountable Governance in the Age of Networks, Partnerships, and Joined-Up Services. Governance. 2002;15:21–40. doi: 10.1111/1468-0491.00178

74

Willems T, Van Dooren W. Lost in diffusion? How collaborative arrangements lead to an accountability paradox. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2011;77:505–30. doi: 10.1177/0020852311408648

75

Alcock P. A strategic unity: defining the third sector in the UK. Voluntary sector review. 2010;1:5–24.

76

Bode I. Co-governance within networks and the non-profit – for-profit divide. Public Management Review. 2006;8:551–66. doi: 10.1080/14719030601022932

77

CUNNINGHAM I. A RACE TO THE BOTTOM? EXPLORING VARIATIONS IN EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS IN THE VOLUNTARY SECTOR. Public Administration. 2008;86:1033–53. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2008.00752.x

78

Davis Smith J. The inflatable log: volunteering, the state and democracy. Voluntary action. 2001;3:13–26.

79

Harris B. Voluntary action and the state in historical perspective. Voluntary sector review. 2010;1:25–40.

80

Harrow J, Jung T. Philanthropy is Dead; Long Live Philanthropy? Public Management Review. 2011;13:1047–56. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2011.619062

81

KELLY J. REFORMING PUBLIC SERVICES IN THE UK: BRINGING IN THE THIRD SECTOR. Public Administration. 2007;85:1003–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00680.x

82

Lewis J. New Labour’s Approach to the Voluntary Sector: Independence and the Meaning of Partnership. Social Policy and Society. 2005;4:121–31. doi: 10.1017/S147474640400226X

83

LOWNDES V, PRATCHETT L, STOKER G. LOCAL POLITICAL PARTICIPATION: THE IMPACT OF RULES-IN-USE. Public Administration. 2006;84:539–61. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00601.x

84

Lowndes V, Sullivan H. Like a Horse and Carriage or a Fish on a Bicycle: How Well do Local Partnerships and Public Participation go Together? Local Government Studies. 2004;30:51–73. doi: 10.1080/0300393042000230920

85

Srinivas N. Against NGOs?: A Critical Perspective on Nongovernmental Action. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2009;38:614–26. doi: 10.1177/0899764009334308

86

Taylor M. Co-option or Empowerment?: The Changing Relationship between the State and the Voluntary and Community Sectors. Local Governance. 2002;28:1–11.

87

Tiwana M, Belay N. Civil society: the clampdown is real. 2010.

88

Aberbach JD, Christensen T. Citizens and Consumers. Public Management Review. 2005;7:225–46. doi: 10.1080/14719030500091319

89

Arnstein SR. A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners. 1969;35:216–24. doi: 10.1080/01944366908977225

90

Bang HP. ‘Yes we can’: identity politics and project politics for a late-modern world. Urban research & practice. 2009;2:117–37.

91

Bang HP, Sorensen E. The everyday maker: a new challenge to democratic governance. Administrative Theory & Praxis. 1999;21:324–41.

92

Davies JS. The governance of urban regeneration: a critique of the ‘governing without government’ thesis. Public Administration. 2002;80:301–22. doi: 10.1111/1467-9299.00305

93

Davies JS. The Limits of Partnership: An Exit-Action Strategy for Local Democratic Inclusion. Political Studies. 2007;55:779–800. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00677.x

94

Dwyer P. Making sense of social citizenship: some user views on welfare rights and responsibilities. Critical Social Policy. 2002;22:273–99. doi: 10.1177/02610183020220020601

95

Hastak, Manoj. The Role of Consumer Surveys in Public Policy Decision Making. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. 2001;20.

96

Johnson C, Osborne SP. Local Strategic Partnerships, Neighbourhood Renewal, and the Limits to Co-governance. Public Money and Management. 2003;23:147–54. doi: 10.1111/1467-9302.00362

97

Nancarrow C, Evans M, Pallister J. Polls apart! Political, research and ethical lessons from UK pressure groups’ use of opinion polls. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing. 2003;8:181–93. doi: 10.1002/nvsm.211

98

Prabhakar R. Commercialisation or Citizenship? Politics. 2004;24:215–20. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9256.2004.00222.x

99

Stolle D, Hooghe M. Consumers as political participants? Shifts in political action repetoires in Western societies. Politics, products, and markets: exploring political consumerism past and present. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers 2003.

100

Roberts N. Public Deliberation in an Age of Direct Citizen Participation. The American Review of Public Administration. 2004;34:315–53. doi: 10.1177/0275074004269288

101

Davis Smith J. ‘The Inflatable Log’: volunteering, the state and democracy. 2001.

102

Alford J. Why Do Public-Sector Clients Coproduce?: Toward a Contingency Theory. Administration & Society. 2002;34:32–56. doi: 10.1177/0095399702034001004

103

Arnstein SR. A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners. 1969;35:216–24. doi: 10.1080/01944366908977225

104

Bovaird T. Beyond Engagement and Participation: User and Community Coproduction of Public Services. Public Administration Review. 2007;67:846–60. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00773.x

105

Brandsen T, Pestoff V. Co-production, the third sector and the delivery of public services. Public Management Review. 2006;8:493–501. doi: 10.1080/14719030601022874

106

Davies JS. The Limits of Partnership: An Exit-Action Strategy for Local Democratic Inclusion. Political Studies. 2007;55:779–800. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00677.x

107

Johnson C, Osborne SP. Local Strategic Partnerships, Neighbourhood Renewal, and the Limits to Co-governance. Public Money and Management. 2003;23:147–54. doi: 10.1111/1467-9302.00362

108

Mitlin D. With and beyond the state -- co-production as a route to political influence, power and transformation for grassroots organizations. Environment and Urbanization. 2008;20:339–60. doi: 10.1177/0956247808096117

109

Pestoff V. Citizens and co-production of welfare services. Public Management Review. 2006;8:503–19. doi: 10.1080/14719030601022882

110

Prentice S. Childcare, co-production and the third sector in Canada. Public Management Review. 2006;8:521–36. doi: 10.1080/14719030601022890

111

Johnson C, Osborne SP. Local Strategic Partnerships, Neighbourhood Renewal, and the Limits to Co-governance. Public Money and Management. 2003;23:147–54. doi: 10.1111/1467-9302.00362

112

Mitlin D. With and beyond the state -- co-production as a route to political influence, power and transformation for grassroots organizations. Environment and Urbanization. 2008;20:339–60. doi: 10.1177/0956247808096117

113

Allen, Barbara Ann. BRIDGING THE DIVIDE - COMMERCIAL PROCUREMENT AND SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT: ARE THERE LESSONS FOR HEALTH CARE COMMISSIONING IN ENGLAND? Journal of Public Procurement. 2009;9:79–108.

114

Aritua B, Smith NJ, Bower D. What risks are common to or amplified in programmes: Evidence from UK public sector infrastructure schemes. International Journal of Project Management. 2011;29:303–12. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.04.004

115

Bartlett W. Quasi‐markets and contracts: A markets and hierarchies perspective on NHS reform. Public money & management. 1991;11:53–61.

116

Baxter K, Weiss M, Le Grand J. The dynamics of commissioning across organisational and clinical boundaries. Journal of Health Organization and Management. 2008;22:111–28. doi: 10.1108/14777260810876295

117

Bovaird T. Public–Private Partnerships: from Contested Concepts to Prevalent Practice. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2004;70:199–215. doi: 10.1177/0020852304044250

118

Bovaird T. Developing New Forms of Partnership With the ‘Market’ in the Procurement of Public Services. Public Administration. 2006;84:81–102. doi: 10.1111/j.0033-3298.2006.00494.x

119

Boyne GA. Competitive Tendering In Local Government: A Review Of Theory And Evidence. Public Administration. 1998;76:695–712. doi: 10.1111/1467-9299.00132

120

Bradley S, Taylor J. The Effect of the Quasi-market on the Efficiency-equity Trade-off in the Secondary School Sector. Bulletin of Economic Research. 2002;54:295–314. doi: 10.1111/1467-8586.00154

121

Bradley S, Taylor J. Diversity, Choice and the Quasi-market: An Empirical Analysis of Secondary Education Policy in England*. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics. 2010;72:1–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0084.2009.00572.x

122

Chalkley M. Competition in NHS quasi-markets. Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 1996;12:89–99. doi: 10.1093/oxrep/12.4.89

123

Dopson S, Locock L. The Commissioning Process in the NHS: The theory and application. Public Management Review. 2002;4:209–29. doi: 10.1080/14616670210130552

124

Fischbacher M, Beaumont PB. PFI, Public—Private Partnerships and the Neglected Importance of Process: Stakeholders and the Employment Dimension. Public Money and Management. 2003;23:171–6. doi: 10.1111/1467-9302.00365

125

Gibbons, Stephen. CHOICE, COMPETITION, AND PUPIL ACHIEVEMENT. Journal of the European Economic Association. 2008;6.

126

Gray KE, Ghosh D. An empirical analysis of the purchaser‐provider relationship in the NHS internal market. Journal of Management in Medicine. 2000;14:57–68. doi: 10.1108/02689230010340561

127

Ham C. World class commissioning: a health policy chimera? Journal of health services policy research. 2008;13:116–21.

128

Hoxley M. Purchasing UK public sector property and construction professional services: competition v quality. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management. 2001;7:133–9. doi: 10.1016/S0969-7012(00)00026-5

129

KNAPP M, HARDY B, FORDER J. Commissioning for Quality: Ten Years of Social Care Markets in England. Journal of Social Policy. 2001;30. doi: 10.1017/S0047279401006225

130

Lunt, Neil. Economic discourse and the market: The case of community care. Public Administration. ;74.

131

Matosevic T, Knapp M, Le Grand J. Motivation and Commissioning: Perceived and Expressed Motivations of Care Home Providers. Social Policy & Administration. 2008;42:228–47. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9515.2007.00594.x

132

Murray JG. Towards a common understanding of the differences between purchasing, procurement and commissioning in the UK public sector. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management. 2009;15:198–202. doi: 10.1016/j.pursup.2009.03.003

133

Petsoulas C, Allen P, Hughes D, et al. The use of standard contracts in the English National Health Service: A case study analysis. Social Science & Medicine. 2011;73:185–92. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.05.021

134

Wade E. Commissioning reform in the NHS: will he who pays the piper ever really call the tune? Clinical Medicine. 2011;11:35–9. doi: 10.7861/clinmedicine.11-1-35

135

Williams I, Bovaird T, Brown H, et al. Designing whole-systems commissioning: Lessons from the English experience. Journal of care services management. 2012;6:83–92.

136

Williams I, Bovaird T, Brown H, et al. Designing whole-systems commissioning: Lessons from the English experience. Journal of care services management. 2012;6:83–92.