Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The destruction phase of public sector innovation: regulations governing school closure in Australia

  • Regular Article
  • Published:
Journal of Evolutionary Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the Schumpeterian conception, innovation is the "perennial gale of creative destruction" (Schumpeter 1976 [1942], p. 84). This evolutionary process consists of two entangled but distinct forces; the creation phase and the destruction phase. This insight has been applied to non-market production. However, studies in public sector innovation are almost exclusively focused on the creation phase. This paper presents a new way of identifying mechanisms for destruction in the public sector context by analyzing the regulatory framework governing service delivery. The study presents an analysis of the regulations governing school closure in Australia, which is supplemented with an historical case study. The study finds that Ministerial discretion is the sole mechanism of school closure. It is proposed that this method of analysis is capable of being applied to other public sector services. Overall, the implication from this analysis is that an understanding of regulatory constraints is fundamental to a Schumpeterian understanding of public sector innovation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. As amended. Note that this Act was repealed effective 1 July 2007 and replaced with the Education Training and Reform Act 2006 (Vic).

  2. This Act was subsequently repealed by the Equal Opportunity Act 1995 (Vic). The current Act is the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic).

  3. Sievers v State of Victoria (1993) EOC 92–482.

  4. This is an extract of the Board’s reasons for its decision in Sinnapan v State of Victoria (No 2) 1994 EOC 92–658 reported at [77,461] - [77,462]. It has been edited for brevity.

  5. Sinnappan v State of Victoria (1993a) EOC 92–498.

  6. Sinnappan v State of Victoria [1993b] 1 VR 547; (1993) EOC 92–499.

  7. Sinnappan v State of Victoria (1994) EOC 92–567.

  8. State of Victoria v Sinnappan (1994) EOC 92–568.

  9. Sinnappan v State of Victoria 1995a1 VR 421.

  10. Sinnappan v State of Victoria (No 2) (1994) EOC 92–658.

  11. Sinnappan v State of Victoria (No 3) (1994) EOC 92–659.

  12. Sinnappan v State of Victoria [1995b] 2 VR 242.

  13. The Bill was introduced before the Northland litigation had concluded. The Bill was not retrospective.

  14. Sections 2.2.2 and 2.3.31 of the Education and Training Reform Act 2006.

References

  • Albury D (2005) Fostering innovation in public services. Public Money Management 25:51–56

  • Autio E (1998) Evaluation of RTD in regional Systems of Innovation. Eur Plan Stud 6:131–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessant J, Watts R (1994) Violence, schools and young people: a preliminary report. Discourse Abingdon 15:49–59

  • Bloch C, Bugge MM (2013) Public sector innovation – from theory to measurement. Struct Chang Econ Dyn 27:133–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloch C, Bugge MM (2016) Between bricolage and breakthroughs—framing the many faces of public sector innovation. Public Money Management 36:281–288

  • Bommert B (2010) Collaborative innovation in the public sector. Int Pub Manag Rev 11:15–33

  • Borins S (2001) Encouraging innovation in the public sector. J Intellect Cap 2:310–319

    Google Scholar 

  • Borins S (2014) The persistence of innovation in government: a guide for innovative public servants. IBM Center for the business of government, Washington, D.C. available online: <https://www.innovations.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/3252703.pdf>. Accessed 10 June 2019

  • Caldwell BJ (1994) Leading the transformation of Australia’s schools. Educ Manag Adm 22:76–84

  • Caldwell BJ, Hayward DK (1998) The future of schools: lessons from the reform of public education. Falmer Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Chadbourne R, Ingvarson L (1998) Self-managing schools and professional community: the professional recognition program in Victoria’s schools of the future. Aust Educ Res 25:61–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Crockett AD (1994) Rules versus discretion in monetary policy. In: De Beaufort Wijnholds JO, Eijffinger SCW, Hoogduin LH (eds) A framework for monetary stability. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 165–184

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vries HA, Bekkers VJJM, Tummers LG (2016) Innovation in the public sector: a systematic review and future research agenda. Public Adm 94:146–166

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vries HA, Bekkers VJJM, Tummers LG (2018a) A stakeholder perspective on public sector innovation: why position matter. Int Rev Adm Sci 28:269–287

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vries HA, Bekkers VJJM, Tummers LG (2018b) The diffusion and adoption of public sector innovations: a meta-synthesis of the literature. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvy001

  • Demircioglu MA (2017) Three essays on public sector innovation. Indiana University, Dissertation

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (2015) National Innovation and Science Agenda. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, <http://innovation.gov.au/system/files/case- study/National%20Innovation%20and%20Science%20Agenda%20-%20Report.pdf>. Accessed December 2015

  • Directorate of School Education (1993a) A quality provision framework for Victorian schools. Victorian Government, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Directorate of School Education (1993b), 1993/94 schools construction program, Education News, vol. 1, no. 6, 16 September 1993

  • Directorate of School Education (1995) Taking stock: co-operative research project leading Victoria’s schools of the future. Victorian Government, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Freiberg A (2017) Regulation in Australia. Federation Press, Annandale

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman C (1987) Technology policy and economic performance: Lessons from Japan. Pinter, London

  • Gonski D, Boston K, Greiner K, Lawrence C, Scales B, Tannock, P (2011) Review of School Funding Final Report. Australian Government, Canberra. <https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/review-of-funding-for-schooling- final-report-dec-2011.pdf>. Accessed 23 January 2017

  • Gonski D, Arcus T, Boston K, Gould V, Johnson W, O’Brien L, Perry L, and Roberts M (2018) Through growth to achievement: report of the review to achieve educational excellence in Australian schools. Australian Government Canberra. <https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/662684_tgta_accessible_final_0.pdf>. Accessed 10 June 2018

  • Hartley J (2005) Innovation in governance and public services: past and present. Public Money Manage 25:27–34

  • Hayward D (1993) Memorandum: quality provision, 10 September 1993

  • Hayward D (2016) The accidental politician. Matthew Hayward, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Hess FM (2010) Does school choice “work”? Nat Aff 5:35–53

  • Hinz B (2016) Federalism and schooling reforms in Australia. University of Melbourne, Dissertation

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood C., Scott C., James O., Jones G., and Travers T (1999 [2002]) Regulation inside government: waste-watchers, quality police and sleaze-busters. Oxford University Press, New York

  • Jolly S (1996) Behind the lines: Richmond secondary college: a school that dared to fight. Global Books, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Kastelle T, Potts J, Dodgson M (2014) The evolution of innovation systems. In: Dopfer K, Potts J (eds) The new evolutionary economics III: evolutionary macroeconomics. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 420–444

    Google Scholar 

  • Klepper S (1996) Entry, exit, growth and innovation over the product life cycle. Am Econ Rev 86:562–583

    Google Scholar 

  • Klepper S, Graddy E (1990) The evolution of new industries and the determinants of market structure. RAND J Econ 21:27–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight T (1998) Public knowledge: public education: Northland Secondary College versus the State. Int J Inclusive Ed 2 (4):295-308

  • Koch PM, Cunningham P, Schwabsky N, Hauknes J (2006) Innovation in the public sector: summary and policy recommendations. NIFU STEP, Oslo

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane AM (2018a) Regulatory constraints on public sector innovation: a case study on Queensland's independent public school program. Aust J Public Adm 77:685–699

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane AM (2018b) Over-regulation in public sector services. In: Allen D, Berg C (eds) Australia’s red tape crisis: the causes and costs of over-regulation. Connor Court, Redland Bay, pp 195–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Malerba F, Orsenigo L (1996) The dynamics and evolution of industries. Ind Corp Chang 5:51–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazzucato M (2013) The entrepreneurial state: debunking public vs. private sector myths. Anthem Press, London

  • McCulloch J, Clayton M (1996) Victoria on the move! Move! Move! Alternative Law Journal 21:103–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Mergel I, Desouza KC (2013) Implementing open innovation in the public sector: the case of challenge.gov. Public Adm Rev 73:882–890

    Google Scholar 

  • Mises LV (1944) Bureaucracy. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulgan G (2007) Ready or not?: taking innovation in the public sector seriously. NESTA, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulgan G (2014) Innovation in the public sector: how can public organisations better create, improve and adapt? NESTA, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulgan G, Albury D (2003) Innovation in the public sector. Cabinet Office, London, Strategy Unit

    Google Scholar 

  • Murmann JP (2003) Knowledge and competitive advantage: the coevolution of firms, technology, and National Institutions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • National Centre for Education Statistics (2018) Digest of Education Statistics < https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/current_tables.asp>. Accessed 30 October 2018

  • Painter J (1993) School bid lost, but unions to Back occupation. The Age, 16 June 1993: 3

  • Pegler T, Easterbrook M (1992) Reprieve for two schools faced with closure. The Age, 19 December 1992, p. 2

  • Potts J (2009) The innovation deficit in public services: the curious problem of too much efficiency and not enough waste and failure. Innov Manag Policy Pract 11:34–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts J (2010) Innovation by elimination: a proposal for negative policy experiments in the public sector. Innov Manag Policy Pract 12:238–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts J (2015) Financing risky science does not make the state an entrepreneur. Aust J Tele Digit Econ 3:70–75

  • Potts J, Kastelle T (2010) Public sector innovation research: What's next? Innov Manag Policy Pract 12:122–137

    Google Scholar 

  • Productivity Commission (2019) Report on government services. Australian Government, Canberra https://www.pc.gov.au/research/ongoing/report-on-government-services>. Accessed 12 June 2019

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter J (1976 [1942]) Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Routledge, London/New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Segerstrom PS, Anant TCA, Dinopoulos E (1990) A Schumpeterian model of the product life cycle. Am Econ Rev 80:1077–1091

    Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen E, Torfing J (2011) Enhancing collaborative innovation in the public sector. Adm Soc 43:842–868

    Google Scholar 

  • Stadler M (1991) R&D dynamics in the product life cycle. J Evol Econ 1:293–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart-Weeks M, Kastelle T (2015) Innovation in the public sector. Aust J Public Adm 74:63–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson S, De Bortoli L, Underwood C (2017) PISA 2015: Reporting Australia's Results. Australian Council for Educational Research. <https://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=ozpisa>. Accessed December 2018

  • Tobin B (1993) Bugle call signals the end of a stand. The Age, 8 December 1993, p. 8

  • Torfing, J (2018) Collaborative innovation in the public sector: the argument. Public Management Review. <https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2018.1430248>

  • Torugsa N, Arundel A (2017) Rethinking the effect of risk aversion on the benefits of service innovations in public administration agencies. Res Policy 46:900–910

    Google Scholar 

  • Townsend T (1996) The self-managing school: miracle or myth? Leading & Managing 2:171–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Victoria (1993a) Parliamentary Debates. Legislative Assembly, 21 October 1993, p. 1204 (D. Hayward)

  • Victoria (1993b) Parliamentary Debates. Legislative Council, 27 October 1993, pp. 819–821 (H. Storey)

  • Victorian Commission of Audit (1993) Report of the Victorian Commission of Audit. Victorian Government, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Windholz EL (2018) Governing through regulation: public policy, regulation and the law. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Windrum P, Garcia-Goni M (2008) A neo-Schumpeterian model of health services innovation. Res Policy 37:649–672

    Google Scholar 

  • Windrum P, Koch PM (2008) Innovation in public sector services: entrepreneurship, creativity and management. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Witt U (2003) Economic policy making in evolutionary perspective. J Evol Econ 13: 77- 94

Table of Cases

  • Sievers v State of Victoria (1993) EOC 92–482

  • Sinnappan v State of Victoria (1993a) EOC 92–498

  • Sinnappan v State of Victoria [1993b] 1 VR 547

  • Sinnappan v State of Victoria (1994) EOC 92–567

  • Sinnappan v State of Victoria [1995a] 1 VR 421

  • Sinnappan v State of Victoria [1995b] 2 VR 242

  • Sinnappan v State of Victoria (No 2) (1994) EOC 92–658

  • Sinnappan v State of Victoria (No 3) (1994) EOC 92–659

  • State of Victoria v Sinnappan (1994) EOC 92–568

Table of Legislation

  • Education (General Provisions) Act 2006 (QLD)

  • Education Act 1958 (Vic) (Repealed)

  • Education Act 1972 (SA)

  • Education Act 1990 (NSW)

  • Education Act 2004 (ACT)

  • Education Act 2015 (NT)

  • Education Act 2016 (Tas)

  • Education and Training Reform Act 2006 (Vic)

  • Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (Vic) (Repealed)

  • Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic)

  • School Education Act 1999 (WA)

  • School Education Regulations 2000 (WA)

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author is grateful for the helpful advice of Professor Jason Potts and Professor Sinclair Davidson on an earlier version of this paper which was presented to the 2018 International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society Conference in Seoul, Korea. The author is appreciative of John Roskam for the loan of archival material from his time in the Victorian education minister’s office that provided useful background. Finally, the author also thanks ISS conference participants and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments that improved the article, and Alastair Berg for editing assistance. The standard disclaimer applies.

Funding

The author acknowledges funding from the Australian Government’s Research Training Program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Business and Law, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia

    Aaron M. Lane

Authors
  1. Aaron M. Lane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aaron M. Lane.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lane, A.M. The destruction phase of public sector innovation: regulations governing school closure in Australia. J Evol Econ 30, 1151–1169 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-019-00637-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-019-00637-8

Keywords

JEL

Search

Navigation