Unpacking policy portfolios: primary and secondary aspects of tool use in policy mixes

References

• Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (1999). Managing in network settings. Policy Studies Review, 16(1), 18–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1999.tb00839.x
   Google Scholar
• Asher, M., & Bali, A. S. (2015). Public pension programs in Southeast Asia: An assessment. Asian Economic Policy Review, 10(2), 225–245. https://doi.org/10.1111/aepr.12100
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asher, M. G., & Nandy, A. (2006). Health financing in Singapore: A case for systemic reforms. International Social Security Review, 59(1), 75–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-246X.2005.00234.x
   Google Scholar
• Auld, G., Cashore, B., Balboa, C., Bozzi, L., & Renckens, S. (2010). Can technological innovations improve private regulation in the global economy? Business and Politics, 12(3), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.2202/1469-3569.1323
   Google Scholar
• Bali, A. S., Capano, G., & Ramesh, M. (2019). Anticipating and designing for policy effectiveness. Policy & Society, 38(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2019.1579502
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bali, A. S., & Ramesh, M. (2017). Designing effective healthcare: Matching policy tools to problems in China. Public Administration and Development, 37(1), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1781
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bali, A. S., & Ramesh, M. (2019). Assessing health reform: Studying tool appropriateness & critical capacities. Policy and Society, 38(1), 148–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2019.1569328
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbazza, E., & Tello, J. E. (2014). A review of health governance: Definitions, dimensions and tools to govern. Health Policy, 116(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.01.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, M. D. (2001). Medical savings accounts in Singapore: A critical inquiry. Journal of health politics. Policy and Law, 26(4), 709–726. https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-26-4-709
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Béland, D., & Howlett, M. (2016). How solutions chase problems: Instrument constituencies in the policy process. Governance, 29(3), 393–409. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12179
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blomqvist, A. (2011). Public sector health care financing. In S. Glied & P. Smith (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of health economics (pp. 257–284). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Borras, S., & Edquist, C. (2013). The choice of innovation policy instruments. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), 1513–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bressers, H., & Klok, P. J. (1988). Fundamentals for a theory of policy instruments. International Journal of Social Economics, 15(3–4), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb014101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cairney, P. (2019). Understanding public policy. Red Globe Press.
   Google Scholar
• Capano, G., & Howlett, M. (2020). The knowns and unknowns of policy instrument analysis: Policy tools and the current research agenda on policy mixes. SAGE Open, 10(1), 1 (January. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019900568
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capano, G., & Lippi, A. (2017). How policy instruments are chosen: Patterns of decision makers’ choices. Policy Sciences, 50(2), 269–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-016-9267-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capano, G., & Woo, J. J. (2017). Resilience and robustness in policy design: A critical appraisal. Policy Sciences, 50(3), 399–426.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carroll, A. E., & Frakt, A. (2017). What makes Singapore’s health care so cheap?’. The New York Times, 2nd October, 2017
   Google Scholar
• Cashore, B., & Howlett, M. (2007). Punctuating which equilibrium? Understanding thermostatic policy dynamics in pacific Northwest forestry. American Journal of Political Science, 51(3), 532–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00266.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapman, R. (2003). A policy mix for environmentally sustainable development-learning from the Dutch experience. New Zealand Journal of Environmental Law, 7, 29–51.
   Google Scholar
• Compton, M. E., & Hart, P. T. (2019). Great policy successes. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Doremus, H. (2003). A policy portfolio approach to biodiversity protection on private lands. Environmental Science & Policy, 6(3), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1462-9011(03)00036-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehrenfel, T. 2018. ‘Lessons the U.S. Can learn from Singapore’s health system’. Health line, 24 January. Health Line and is an online magazine. https://www.healthline.com/health-news/us-can-learn-from-singapore-health-system#1
   Google Scholar
• Esping-Andersen, G. (Ed.). (1996). Welfare states in transition: National adaptations in global economies. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Givoni, M., Macmillen, J., Banister, D., & Feitelson, E. (2013). From policy measures to policy packages. Transport Reviews, 33(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2012.744779
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haber, H. (2011). Regulating-for-welfare: A comparative study of “regulatory welfare regimes” in the Israeli, British, and Swedish electricity sectors. Law & Policy, 33(1), 116–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9930.2010.00332.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, P. A. (1993). Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: The case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25(3), 275–296. https://doi.org/10.2307/422246
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris, R. A., & Milkis, S. M. (1989). The politics of regulatory change: A tale of two agencies. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haseltine, W. A. (2013). Affordable excellence: The Singapore healthcare story: How to create and manage sustainable healthcare systems. Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hennicke, P. (2004). Scenarios for a robust policy mix: The final report of the German study commission on sustainable energy supply. Energy Policy, 32(15), 1673–1678. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(03)00163-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hood, C. (1983). The tools of governments. Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Hood, C. (2007). Intellectual obsolescence and intellectual makeovers: Reflections on the tools of government after two decades. Governance, 20(1), 127–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2007.00347.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hou, Y., & Brewer, G. (2010). Substitution and supplementation between co- functional policy instruments: Evidence from state budget stabilization practices. Public Administration Review, 70(6), 914–924. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02223.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howlett, M. (2000). Managing the “hollow state”: Procedural policy instruments and modern governance. Canadian Public Administration, 43(4), 412–431. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-7121.2000.tb01152.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howlett, M. (2018). The criteria for effective policy design: Character and context in policy instrument choice. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 11(3), 245–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2017.1412284
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howlett, M. (2019). Designing public policies: Principles and instruments. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., Capano, G., & Ramesh, M. (2018). Designing for robustness: Surprise, agility and improvisation in policy design. Policy and Society.
   Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., & Lejano, R. (2013). Tales from the Crypt: The rise and fall (and Re-Birth?) of policy design studies. Administration & Society, 45(3), 356–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399712459725
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., Mukherjee, I., & Woo, J. J. (2015). From tools to toolkits in policy design studies: The new design orientation towards policy formulation research. Policy and Politics, 43(2), 291–311. https://doi.org/10.1332/147084414X13992869118596
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., Ramesh, M., & Perl, A. (2020). Studying public policy: Policy cycles and policy subsystems (Vol. 4). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., & Rayner, J. (2007). Design principles for policy mixes: Cohesion and coherence in “new governance arrangements.”. Policy and Society, 26(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1449-4035(07)70118-2
   Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., & del Rio, P. (2015). “The Parameters of Policy Portfolios: Verticality and Horizontality in Design Spaces and Their Consequences for Policy Mix Formulation.”Environment and Planning C,
   Google Scholar
• Hsiao, W., & Shaw, R. P. (Eds.). (2007). Social health insurance for developing nations. The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Hsiao, W. C. (2001). Commentary: Behind the ideology and theory: What is the empirical evidence for medical savings accounts?Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 26(4), 733–737. https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-26-4-733
   Google Scholar
• Jochim, A. E., & May, P. J. (2010). Beyond subsystems: Policy regimes and governance. Policy Studies Journal, 38(2), 303–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00363.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kern, F., & Howlett, M. (2009). Implementing transition management as policy reforms: A case study of the Dutch energy sector. Policy Sciences, 42(4), 391–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-009-9099-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knill, C., Schulze, K., & Tosun, J. (2012). Regulatory policy outputs and impacts: Exploring a complex relationship. Regulation & Governance, 6(4), 427–444. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2012.01150.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulesher, R., & Forrestal, E. (2014). International models of health systems financing. Journal of Hospital Administration, 3(4), 127–139. https://doi.org/10.5430/jha.v3n4p127
   Google Scholar
• Langenbrunner, J. C., O’Duagherty, S., & Cashin, C. S. (Eds.). (2009). Designing and implementing health care provider payment systems: “ How-to” manuals. The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Levi-Faur, D. (2014). The welfare state: A regulatory perspective. Public Administration, 92(3), 599–614.https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linder, S. H., & Peters, B. G. (1989). Instruments of government: Perceptions and contexts. Journal of Public Policy, 9(1), 35–58. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X00007960
   Google Scholar
• Liu, X. (2003). Policy tools for allocative efficiency of health services. World Health Organization.
   Google Scholar
• Lowi, T. J. (1972). Four systems of policy, politics, and choice. Public Administration Review, 32(4), 298–310. https://doi.org/10.2307/974990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• May, P. J., Jones, B. D., Beem, B. E., Neff-Sharum, E. A., & Poague, M. K. (2005). Policy coherence and component driven policy making: Arctic policy in Canada and the United States. Policy Studies Journal, 33(1), 37–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2005.00091.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• May, P. J., Sapotichne, J., & Workman, S. (2006). Policy coherence and policy domains. Policy Studies Journal, 34(3), 381–403. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2006.00178.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDermott, C. L., Cashore, B., & Kanowski, P. (2009). Setting the bar: An international comparison of public and private forest policy specifications and implications for explaining policy trends. Environmental Sciences, 6(3), 217–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/19438150903090533
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDermott, C. L., Cashore, B., & Kanowski, P. (2010). Global environmental forest policies: An international comparison. London: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• McKee, M., & Busse, R. (2013). Medical savings accounts: Singapore’s non-solution to healthcare costs. BMJ, 347(jul31 2), f4797. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f4797
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Milkman, K. L., Mazza, M. C., Shu, L. L., Tsay, C. J., & Bazerman, M. H. (2012). Policy bundling to overcome loss aversion: A method for improving legislative outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 158–167.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moran, M. (2000). Understanding the welfare state: The case of health care. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 2(2), 135–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-856X.00031
   Google Scholar
• Peters, B. G. (2018). Policy problems and policy design. Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, B. G. (2021). Administrative traditions: Understanding the roots of contemporary administrative behavior. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, B. G., & Van Nispen, F. (1998). Public policy instruments: Evaluating the tools of public administration. Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Ramesh, M. (2008). Autonomy and control in public hospital reforms in Singapore. The American Review of Public Administration, 38(1), 62–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074007301041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramesh, M., & Bali, A. S. (2019). The Remarkable Case of Health Care Performance in Singapore. In M. Compton & P. t’Hart (Eds.), Great policy successes: How governments get it right in a big way at least some of the time, (Chapter 3, pp. 42–62) Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ramesh, M., & Bali, A. S. (2021, forthcoming). Health policy in Asia: A policy design approach. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, J., Howlett, M., & Wellstead, A. (2017). Policy mixes and their alignment over time: Patching and stretching in the oil sands reclamation regime in Alberta, Canada: Alberta Oil Sands. Environmental Policy and Governance, 27(5), 472–483. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1773
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson, J. (december2000). Government, interest groups and policy change. Political Studies, 48(5), 1006–1025. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.00292
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogge, K. S., & Reichardt, K. (2016). Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis. Research Policy, 45(8), 1620–1635.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruderman, A. P. (1988). Health planning in Singapore: Limits to privatization. Journal of Public Health Policy, 9(1), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.2307/3342146
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Saguin, K. (2020) Policy completeness of new governance arrangements. Paper presented at the University of Melbourne-NUS Workshop on Policy Tools, January 23-24, 2020. Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne
   Google Scholar
• Salamon, L. M. (2002). The tools of government. A guide to the New Governance. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schaffrin, A., Sewerin, S., & Seubert, S. (2014). The Innovativeness of national policy portfolios – Climate policy change in Austria. Germany, and the UK. Environmental Politics, 23(5), 860–883. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2014.924206
   Google Scholar
• Schaffrin, A., Sewerin, S., & Seubert, S. (2015). Toward a comparative measure of climate policy output. Policy Studies Journal, 43(2), 257–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12095
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt, T. S., & Sewerin, S. (2019). Measuring the temporal dynamics of policy mixes – An empirical analysis of renewable energy policy mixes’ balance and design features in nine countries. Research Policy, 48(10), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.03.012
   Google Scholar
• Sterner, T. (2003). Policy instruments for environmental and natural resource management.  New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Thomann, E. (2018). Donate your organs, donate life! Explicitness in Policy Instruments. Policy Sciences, 51(4), 433–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-018-9324-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, J. S., Ong, S. E., Chia, K. S., & Lee, H. P. (2016). A brief history of public health in Singapore. In C. Y. Lee & K. Saktu (Eds.), Singapore’s health care system: What 50 years have achieved (pp. 33–56). Singapore: World Scientific.
   Google Scholar
• Voß, J.-P., & Simons, A. (2014). Instrument constituencies and the supply side of policy innovation: The social life of emissions trading. Environmental Politics, 23(5), 735–754. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2014.923625
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weible, C. M., & Sabatier, P. A. (2009). Coalitions, science, and belief change: Comparing adversarial and collaborative policy subsystems. Policy Studies Journal, 37(2), 195–212. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2009.00310.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilder, M. (2017). Comparative public policy: Origins, themes, new directions. Policy Studies Journal, 45(S1), S47–S66. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12200
   Google Scholar
• World Bank. (2018). World development indicators.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, X., & Ramesh, M. (2014). Market imperfections, government imperfections, and policy mixes: Policy innovations in Singapore. Policy Sciences, 47(3), 305–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-013-9186-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar