Public Administration

K13 - Innovation and Alternative Service Delivery

Date: Jun 4 | Time: 01:45pm to 03:15pm | Location:

Chair/Président/Présidente : Valérie Vézina (Kwantlen University)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Poland Lai (York University)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Valérie Vézina (Kwantlen University)

Building a Culture of Innovation in the Public Sector: Sandra Hodzic (Sandra Hodzic Business Consulting)
Abstract: Abstract Innovation in the public sector is increasingly recognized as a key driver of improved services, operational efficiency, and policy responsiveness. However, fostering a culture of innovation within government institutions presents unique challenges due to hierarchical structures, risk aversion, and bureaucratic inertia. This paper explores strategies for building a culture of innovation in the public sector, drawing on case studies from various Canadian provinces and international experiences. The paper argues that successful innovation requires a holistic approach, integrating leadership commitment, cross-departmental collaboration, and continuous learning. Most importantly, this paper highlights key barriers, which I call the “7 SINS of Innovation:” 1. Lack of Experimentation Culture 2. No Leadership Support 3. Strict Hierarchies 4. Dogma 5. A lack of Strategic Alignment 6. Lack of Innovation Budget 7. Lack of Innovation Accounting for Return on Investment Each of these components will be explored in more detail and the research will highlight the importance of creating a supportive environment where politicians and public servants are empowered to experiment with new ideas, informed by data-driven insights and evidence-based practices. Furthermore, the role of digital transformation and technological tools is examined as critical enablers of innovation, streamlining processes and enhancing citizen engagement. To overcome these challenges, it advocates for policy reforms that promote agile governance, reduce red tape, and encourage partnerships with private and non-profit sectors. Ultimately, building a culture of innovation in the public sector is essential for modernizing government services, fostering public trust, and meeting the evolving needs of citizens in a dynamic socio-political landscape. This research contributes to the ongoing discourse on public sector innovation and provides practical recommendations for policymakers aiming to cultivate a more adaptive and forward-thinking government. Keywords: innovation, social innovation, culture

Rethinking Alternative Service Delivery within the New Public Governance Paradigm: The Case of Agrifood Innovation Policy Delivery in Canada: Charles Conteh (Brock University)
Abstract: The proposed paper will examine recent deployments of alternative service delivery (ASD) mechanisms within the context of new public governance (NPG) as the prevalent paradigm shaping the discourse and practice of public administration in liberal democratic systems. The popularity of ASDs reached its zenith during the halcyon days of the new public management (NPM) in the 1980s and 1990s. Although ASD mechanisms survived the controversies and public backlash that haunted NPM, they also underwent a significant transformation as the rationale for their deployment shifted from market-driven to governance-based discourses. These trends reflect broader paradigmatic shifts in public administration scholarship and practice. Embedded within what is now the NPG discourse, the prevalent rationale for ASDs is that arms-length organizations offer greater legitimacy to governments’ policy ventures by nesting program design and delivery processes within the policy subsystems of targeted communities. Empirically, the paper will examine the Canadian government’s recent deployment of several autonomous organizational entities mandated to deliver a large swathe of its agrifood innovation programs. These organizations are tasked with intermediating between the government’s broad policy vision on the one hand and the specific initiatives of a network of entrepreneurs, non-profits and research entities in Canada’s agricultural, agrifood and technology ecosystems. The proposed paper will analyze the mandates and activities of several of these organizations as illustrative case studies of recent ASD trends in Canada. The discussion will conclude with practical and theoretical inferences about the shifting contours of ASDs within the context of NPG discourses in liberal democratic systems worldwide.

Le conseil scientifique et la politique : une définition exhaustive et collaborative: Alexandre Fortier-Chouinard (Université Laval), Adrien Cloutier (Université Laval), Mathieu Ouimet (Université Laval)
Abstract: Le conseil scientifique en politique peut prendre diverses formes. Parfois, les ministres, députés d'opposition et autres élus s'entourent de conseillers avec des expertises reconnues dans des domaines particuliers, afin de vérifier la faisabilité ou les coûts liés à une certaine mesure. Parfois, des recherchistes sont chargés par un parti politique de fouiller sur Google Scholar ou directement sur des bases de données scientifiques telles que Cochrane Reviews et Social Systems Evidence. Dans certains pays, le gouvernement fait également appel à un scientifique en chef ou à un conseil consultatif regroupant des scientifiques de différents domaines dans le but de faire des recommandations politiques qui peuvent être appliquées ou mises de côté par le gouvernement. Dans un premier temps, ce projet vise à répertorier les différentes formes de conseil scientifique afin d'en élaborer une typologie. En ce sens, il fera la mise à jour d'un rapport préparé par l'International Network for Government Science Advice (INGSA) (Gluckman et al., 2022) qui répertorie les types de corps scientifiques pouvant conseiller un gouvernement. Ce rapport ne considère pas les structures de conseil scientifique universitaires et sans but lucratif, bien qu'il s'agisse de deux secteurs d'où émanent de nombreuses innovations en synthèse et intermédiation des connaissances. Cette nouvelle typologie, qui se veut donc plus exhaustive, permettra de répertorier les différentes formes de conseil scientifique dans le monde politique et de les regrouper par catégorie (conseil scientifique général ou pour un enjeu spécifique; consultation de sources ou de personnes expertes; dirigé envers le gouvernement en général, un député d'opposition, etc.). Dans un deuxième temps, la méthode de prise de décision Delphi sera employée pour raffiner la typologie créée. Ainsi, une série de sondages Qualtrics seront programmés pour recueillir les opinions d'un panel d'experts en conseil scientifique issus de plusieurs pays et organismes au sujet de cette typologie. Après la première phase du sondage, un rapport de synthèse sera préparé afin de mettre en exergue les points de convergence et de divergence dans les opinions d'experts sur la typologie du conseil scientifique. Ce rapport sera renvoyé aux experts, qui devront répondre à un ou plusieurs sondages de suivi leur demandant de nouvelles suggestions concernant cette typologie après avoir tenu compte des opinions de leurs pais experts en conseil scientifique. Les questions de sondage seront adaptées au fur et à mesure de ce processus jusqu'à ce qu'un consensus émerge à la suite du processus de consultation itératif.

Doing It All? Liberal Notions of Social Procurement in Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom: Noah Fry (McMaster University)
Abstract: Today more than ever, the rules-based international order faces a crisis of belonging and inclusion. In this context, Western liberal states have embraced different responses. One response is to use public sector purchasing to re-invest in marginalized communities and meet societal objectives. This response is broadly referred to as social procurement. Social procurement offers a means to include outsiders but is undercut by international trade commitments and liberalization logics. This paper examines three such case studies in the national social procurement initiatives of Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom respectively. Using primary documentary analysis and purchasing disclosure datasets, I find that all three national governments have recently introduced new social procurement initiatives that suffer from similar problems. That is, each case shows a deference for free market approaches, a commitment to maximizing foreign participation through trade, and a reliance on procuring entities and officers to independently define and measure social value. These problems severely limit the potential of social procurement to render this rules-based order more inclusive. In turn, this prompts us to ask how far liberal notions of public purchasing can go to address this crisis. The paper concludes with potential options for expanding these initiatives within and beyond the scope of trade treaties.