The missing link? Finance, public services, and co-production: The case of social impact bonds (SIBs)

References

• Arena, M., Bengo, I., Calderini, M., & Chiodo, V. (2016). Social impact bonds: Blockbuster or flash in a pan? International Journal of Public Administration, 39(12), 927–939. doi: 10.1080/01900692.2015.1057852
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovaird, T. (2005). Public governance: Balancing stakeholder power in a network society. International, Review of Administrative Sciences, 71(2), 217–228. doi: 10.1177/0020852305053881
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovaird, T. (2007). Beyond engagement and participation: User and community coproduction of public services. Public Administration Review, 67, 846–860. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00773.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cabinet Office. (2013). Growing the social investment market: A vision and strategy. London: Cabinet Office.
   Google Scholar
• Dear, A., Helbitz, A., Khare, R., Lotan, R., Newman, J., Crosby Sims, G., & Zaroulis, A. (2016). Social impact bonds. The early years, Social Finance.
   Google Scholar
• Disley, E., & Rubin, J. (2014). Phase 2 report from the payment by results social impact bond pilot at HMP peterborough, RAND europe, Ministry of Justice Analytical Series.
   Google Scholar
• Disley, E., Giacomantonio, C., Kruithof, K., & Sim, M. (2015). The payment by results social impact bond pilot at HMP peterborough: Final process evaluation report RAND europe, Ministry of Justice Analytical Series.
   Google Scholar
• Disley, E., Rubin, J., Scraggs, E., Burrowes, N., & Culley, D. (2011). Lessons learned from the planning and early implementation of the social impact bond at HMP peterborough, RAND europe, Ministry of Justice Analytical Series.
   Google Scholar
• Dowling, E. (2017). In the wake of austerity: Social impact bonds and the financialisation of the welfare state in Britain. New Political Economy, 22(3), 294–310. doi: 10.1080/13563467.2017.1232709
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drew, R., & Clist, C. (2015). Evaluating development impact bonds. A study for DFID, department for international development uk, February.
   Google Scholar
• Farr, M. (2016). Co-production and value co-creation in outcome-based contracting in public services. Public Management Review, 18(5), 654–672. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2015.1111661
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustafsson-Wright, E., & Gardiner, S. (2015). Policy Recommendations for the applications of impact bonds. Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Gustafsson-Wright, E., Gardiner, S., & Putcha, V. (2015). The potential and limitations of impact bonds. Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, O., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). The proper scope of government: Theory and an application to prisons. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), 1127–1161. doi: 10.1162/003355300555448
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochstadter, A. K., & Scheck, B. (2015). What’s in a name: An analysis of impact investing understandings by academics and practitioners. Journal of Business Ethics, 132, 449–475. doi: 10.1007/s10551-014-2327-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joy, M., & Shields, J. (2013). Social impact bonds: The next phase of third sector marketization? Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research, 4(2), 39–55. doi: 10.22230/cjnser.2013v4n2a148
   Google Scholar
• McHugh, N., Sinclair, S., Roy, M., Huckfield, L., & Donaldson, C. (2013). Social impact bonds: A wolf in sheep’s clothing? Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 21(3), 247–257. doi: 10.1332/204674313X13812372137921
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2015). Social impact investment. building the evidence base. Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2016). Social impact bonds: State of play & lessons learnt. Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, S., & Strokosch, K. (2013). It takes two to tango? Understanding the co-production of public services by integrating the services management and public administration perspectives. British Journal of Management, 24, S31–S47. doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.12010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, S., Radnor, Z., & Nasi, G. (2013). A new theory for public services management? Towards a (public) service dominant approach. American Review of Public Administration, 43, 135–158. doi: 10.1177/0275074012466935
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, S., Radnor, Z., Kinder, T., & Vidal, I. (2015). The service framework: A public-service-dominant approach to sustainable public services. British Journal of Management, 26, 424–438. doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.12094
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsons, J., Weiss, C., & Wei, Q. (2016). Impact evaluation of the adolescent behavioral learning experience (ABLE) program. VERA Institute of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• Pauly, M., & Swanson, A. (2017). Social impact bonds: New product or new package? The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 33(4), 718–760.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudd, T., Nicoletti, E., Misner, K., & Bonsu, J. (2013). Financing promising evidence-based programs, MDRC.
   Google Scholar
• SIIT. (2014). Allocating for impact, September.
   Google Scholar
• SIIT. (2014b). Impact investment: the invisible heart of markets, September.
   Google Scholar
• Sinclair, S., McHugh, N., Huckfield, E., Roy, M., & Donaldson, C. (2014). Social impact bonds: Shifting the boundaries of citizenship. In K. Farnsworth, Z. Irving, & M. Fenger (Eds.), Social policy review 26: Analysis and debate in social policy (pp. 111–128). Bristol: The Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Warner, M. E. (2013). Private finance for public goods: Social impact bonds. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 16(4), 303–319. doi: 10.1080/17487870.2013.835727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss Carol, H., Connell J.P., Kubisch A.C., Schorr L.B. & Weiss C.H. (Eds.), (1995). Nothing as practical as good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives for children and families’. In New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Concepts, methods, and contexts. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.
   Google Scholar