The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Termination, aggregation, or replacement? A competing risks approach to agency transitions
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Agencies operate in highly volatile and uncertain environments. Changing political coalitions and sudden crises may result in the reorganization of agencies. Under these circumstances, agencies may experience a variety of structural transitions. The uncertainties and the inevitability of compromises, however, deem it difficult to predict which of all possible forms of structural change agencies will experience. In this article, we develop and test competing risks models that aim to capture situations in which administrative agencies may experience one out of range of possible transitions. The models are tested on dataset of 483 agencies established between 1945 and 2012 in the Netherlands. Our main finding is that the different transitions that agencies can experience have different underlying causal processes. Herewith the study empirically demonstrates that agency reorganization is not a binary choice between life and death and shows the value of competing risks approaches to the agency termination literature.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Research works printed but not linked: 48
- 10.1007/s11115-007-0033-4 · DOI
- 10.1111/puar.12396 · DOI
- 10.1017/S0007123416000077 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1468-0491.2010.01487.x · DOI
- 10.1080/10967494.2016.1276494 · DOI
- 10.1093/pan/mph016 · DOI
- Christensen J. G., 2001, Politicians, bureaucrats and administrative reform, 119
- Daniels M. R., 1997, Terminating public programs: An American political paradox
- DeLeon P., 1978, The policy cycle, 279
- 10.1080/01402389908425289 · DOI
- 10.1111/psj.12253 · DOI
- 10.1080/10967494.2014.958805 · DOI
- Downs A., 1966, Inside bureaucracy
- 10.1017/CBO9780511609312 · DOI
- 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19990330)18:6<695::AID-SIM60>3.0.CO;2-O · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/0095399715597267 · DOI
- 10.1214/aos/1176350951 · DOI
- Greasley S., 2016, Credibility and agency termination under parliamentarism, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26, 159
- 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01794.x · DOI
- Hogwood B. W., 1983, Policy dynamics
- Hult K. M., 1987, Agency merger and bureaucratic redesign, 10.2307/jj.13245891 · DOI
- James O. Petrovsky N. Moseley A. &Boyne G. A.(2015).The politics of agency death: Ministers and the survival of government agencies in a parliamentary system 46(4) 763–784. · DOI
- 10.1002/9781118032985 · DOI · Paper page
- Kaufman H., 1976, Are government organizations immortal?
- 10.1111/padm.12399 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11115-017-0376-4 · DOI
- Lehmann P., 2017, Manifesto corpus. Version: 2017‐1
- 10.1111/1468-2508.00119 · DOI
- 10.1017/S0007123404000109 · DOI
- Lowi T. J., 1969, The end of liberalism: Ideology, policy, and the crisis of public authority
- 10.1111/padm.12093 · DOI
- 10.1080/01900692.2012.715558 · DOI
- Moe T. M., 1995, Organisation theory: From Chester Barnard to the present and beyond, 116, 10.1093/oso/9780195098303.003.0007 · DOI · Paper page
- Munneke H. F., 1983, Organen en rechtspersonen rondom de centrale overheid. Deel I: Overzicht van organen met openbaar gezag
- Niskanen W. A., 1971, Bureaucracy and representative government
- 10.1787/gov_glance-2017-en · DOI
- 10.1080/01402382.2015.1010273 · DOI
- 10.1080/10967494.2013.825491 · DOI
- 10.1002/9780470870709 · DOI
- Pollitt C., 2011, Public management reform: A comparative analysis – New public management, governance and the Neo‐Weberian state
- 10.1080/01900692.2011.572693 · DOI
- 10.1080/01900692.2012.715562 · DOI
- Rose R., 1994, Inheritance in public policy: Change without choice in Britain
- Stinchcombe A. L., 1965, The handbook of organizations, 142
- 10.1515/9781400831456 · DOI
- 10.1111/padm.12524 · DOI
- 10.1002/pad.316 · DOI
- 10.1080/14719037.2016.1266021 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Guardian State: Strengthening the public service against democratic backsliding
Yesilkagit, K., Bauer, M., Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (2024) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/puar.13808 · Cited by 112
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Yesilkagit, K.
- Affiliations
- Leiden University (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Yesilkagit, Kutsal
- ORCID
- Yesilkagit, Kutsal
- Venue
- Governance
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-09-03
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 803-819
- ISSN
- 0952-1895 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-0491
- OpenAlex
- W3083659581
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 3.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Governance (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Public Administration and Governance
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
- Keywords
- administrative agencies, agency reorganization, competing risk model, political alliances, Dutch public administration
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Termination, aggregation, or replacement? A competing risks approach to agency transitions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/gove.12532
- The paper
- Yesilkagit, K. (2021). Termination, aggregation, or replacement? A competing risks approach to agency transitions. Governance. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12532
