IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/pbudge/v45y2025i4p28-40.html

Budgeting for Innovation: How Funding Strategies Enable or Constrain Public Sector Experimentation

Author

Listed:
  • Ringa Raudla
  • Külli Sarapuu
  • James W. Douglas
  • Johanna Vallistu
  • Nastassia Harbuzova

Abstract

We investigate how different funding strategies influence the incentives and capacities of government organizations to undertake experiments. We focus on the effects of “earmarked” vs. “hodgepodge” funding and the implications of different approaches to designing earmarked funding (system‐level vs. organization‐level; top‐down vs. bottom‐up). We conducted 66 interviews with public officials in Estonia and Finland. We find that different funding strategies influence the scope of public sector experiments. System‐level top‐down earmarked funding facilitated the launch of strategic large‐scale policy experiments in Finland. Reliance on hodgepodge funding of experiments in Estonia has led to predominantly small‐scale experiments and increased transaction costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Ringa Raudla & Külli Sarapuu & James W. Douglas & Johanna Vallistu & Nastassia Harbuzova, 2025. "Budgeting for Innovation: How Funding Strategies Enable or Constrain Public Sector Experimentation," Public Budgeting & Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 28-40, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:pbudge:v:45:y:2025:i:4:p:28-40
    DOI: 10.1111/pbaf.12402
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/pbaf.12402
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/pbaf.12402?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:pbudge:v:45:y:2025:i:4:p:28-40. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0275-1100 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.