Open Tenders in Public Procurement of Welfare Services: Professionalization, Standardization, and Innovation among Civil Sector Providers

References

• Anheier, H. K., & Salamon, L. M. (2006). The nonprofit sector in comparative perspective. In W. W. Powell & R. Steinberg (Eds.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (pp. 89–114). http://ebookcentral.proquest.com
   Google Scholar
• Bergsgard, N. A., Fjær, S., Nødland, S. I., & Ravneberg, B. (2010). Sivilt rusarbeid – mellom statlig styring og økende mangfold [Civil associations work for drug addicts—between public governing and increasing diversity]. Rapport IRIS. – 201/063.
   Google Scholar
• Bock Segaard, S. (2016). Velferdsmiks og rammevilkår for private tjenesteleverandører i Norge, Danmark og Sverige [Welfare mix and framework conditions for private service providers in Norway, Denmark and Sweden]. In K. H. Sivesind (Ed.), Mot en ny skandinavisk velferdsmodell? Konsekvenser av ideell, kommersiell og offentlig tjenesteyting for aktivt medborgerskap (pp. 40–49). ISF.
   Google Scholar
• Bradach, J. L., & Eccles, R. G. (1989). Price, authority, and trust – from ideal types to plural forms. Annual Review of Sociology, 15(1), 97–118. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.15.080189.000525
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Considine, M. (2003). Governance and competition: The role of non-profit organisations in the delivery of public services. Australian Journal of Political Science, 38(1), 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/1036114032000056251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahlberg, L. (2005). Interaction between voluntary and statutory social service provision in Sweden: A matter of welfare pluralism, substitution or complementarity? Social Policy and Administration, 39(7), 740–763. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2005.00467.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). Constructing an organizational field as a professional project: U.S. Art Museum, 1920–1940. In W. Powell & J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analyses (pp. 267–292). University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, P. J., & Anheier, H. K. (1990). The sociology of nonprofit organizations and sectors. Annual Review of Sociology, 16(1), 137–159. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.16.080190.001033
   Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. (1991). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. In W. Powell & J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analyses (pp. 41–62). University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1983).
   Google Scholar
• Edquist, C., Vonortas, N. S., & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M. (2015). Introduction. In C. Edquist, N. S. Vonortas, J. M. Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, & J. Edler (Eds.), Public procurement for innovation (pp. 1–31). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Evers, A. (2005). Mixed welfare systems and hybrid organizations: Changes in the governance and provision of social services. Intl. Journal of Public Administration, 28(9-10), 737–748. https://doi.org/10.1081/PAD-200067318
   Google Scholar
• Garud, R., Hardy, C., & Maguire, S. (2005). Institutional entrepreneurship as embedded agency: An introduction to the special issue. Organization Studies, 28(7), 957–969. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607078958
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garud, R., & Karnøe, P. (2003). Bricolage versus breakthrough: Distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 32(2), 277–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00100-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kildal, N., & Kuhnle, S. (2005). Normative foundations of the welfare state. The Nordic experience. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Knight, K. E. (1967). A descriptive model of the intra-firm innovation process. The Journal of Business, 40(4), 478–496. https://doi.org/10.1086/295013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lie, T., & Nesvåg, S. (2006). Evaluering av rusreformen [Evaluation of the drug reform]. IRIS-rapport 227.
   Google Scholar
• Loga, J. (2018). Sivilsamfunnets roller i velferdsstatens omstilling [The roles of civil society in reforming the welfare state]. Norsk Sosiologisk Tidsskrift, 2(1), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2535-2512-2018-01-05
   Google Scholar
• Lorentzen, H. (2004). Fellesskapets fundament. Sivilsamfunnet og individualismen [The foundation of community. Civil society and individualism]. Pax.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutional organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministry of Health and Care Services. (2002). Om lov om endringer i lov 13. Desember 1991 nr. 81 om sosiale tjenester m.v. Og i enkelte andre lover (statlig overtakelse av deler av fylkeskommunens ansvar for tiltak for rusmiddelmisbrukere). Ot.prp. Nr. 3 (2002-2003).
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Health and Care Services. (2004). Rusreformen – pasientrettigheter og endringer i spesialisthelsetjenesteloven. Regulation I-8/2004.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. (2002). Samordning av Aetat, trygdeetat og sosialtjenesten Stortingsmelding nr. 14 (2002–2003).
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. (2004). En ny arbeids- og velferdsforvaltning. NOU 2004:13.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. (2006). Arbeid, velferd, inkludering. St. Meld. No. 9 (2006-2007).
   Google Scholar
• Møller, G., & Sannes, J. (2009). Evaluering av arbeidsmarkedstiltak i skjermede virksomheter [Evaluation of labour market measures in shielded enterprises]. Rapport 253. Telemarksforsking.
   Google Scholar
• Pestoff, V. (2014). Hybridity, coproduction and third sector social services in Europe. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(1), 1412–1424. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214534670
   Google Scholar
• Ravndal, E. (1994). Drug abuse, psychopathology and treatment in hierarchical therapeutic community [Doctoral dissertation], University of Oslo.
   Google Scholar
• Ravneberg, B. (2000). Nødsarbeid, hjelp til selvhjelp, forkynnelse eller sosialpolitisk likestilling? [Emergency work, help to self-help, preaching or social policy equality?]. In J. Froestad, P. Solvang, & M. Söder (Eds.), Funksjonshemning, politikk og samfunn (pp. 176-198). Gyldendal Akademiske.
   Google Scholar
• Salamon, L. M. (1996). Partners in public service: Government–nonprofit relations in the modern welfare state. Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sivesind, K. H. (2016). Endring av fordelingen mellom ideelle, kommersielle og offentlige velferdstjenester i Skandinavia [change of distribution between ideal, commercial and public welfare services in Scandinavia]. In K. H. Sivesind (Ed.), Mot en ny skandinavisk velferdsmodell? Konsekvenser av ideell, kommersiell og offentlig tjenesteyting for aktivt medborgerskap (pp. 40–49). ISF.
   Google Scholar
• Sivesind, K. H. (2017). The changing roles of for-profit and nonprofit welfare provision in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. In K. H. Sivesind & J. Saglie (Eds.), Promoting active citizenship. Markets and choice in Scandinavian welfare (pp. 33–74). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, S. R., & Grønbjerg, K. A. (2006). Scope and theory of government–nonprofit relations. In W. W. Powell & R. Steinberg (Eds.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (pp. 222–242). http://ebookcentral.proquest.com
   Google Scholar
• Smith, S., & Lipsky, M. (1995). Non-profits for hire: The welfare state in the age of contracting. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ucsn-ebooks/detail.action?docID=3300277
   Google Scholar
• Stryjan, Y., & Wijkstrom, F. (1996). Cooperatives and nonprofit organizations in Swedish social welfare. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 67(1), 5–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8292.1996.tb01945.x
   Google Scholar
• Tjønndalen, A. (2016). Innovation for social inclusion in sport. In V. Ratten & J. Ferreira (Eds.), Sport entrepreneurship and innovation (pp. 42–59). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Tjønndalen, A. (2018). Vilje til inklusjon. Studier av innovasjon for sosial inkludering i idrett [The intention to include: Studies of innovation for social inclusion in sports] [Doctoral dissertation] Nord University.
   Google Scholar
• Uhre, A. N., & Rommetvedt, H. (2019). Civil associations and interest groups in the policy-making process: Pluralisation and generalisation of interests. Interest Groups & Advocacy, 8(2), 233–253. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41309-019-00049-w
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williamson, O. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism. Free Press.
   Google Scholar