Change and Resiliency of Ministerial Logics: Social Ministries in a Neo-Liberal and Managerial Policy Paradigm

The concept of ministerial logics suggests that different types of ministries (e.g., finance, welfare, environment) are likely to exhibit distinct forms of logics: operational logics, mechanisms and instruments, and stakeholder environments. They are thus systematically associated with different substantive policy preferences—even on similar policy issues. This variation reflects several factors: civil servants’ education and training, professional networks and norms, and interactions with distinct sets of stakeholders (Garritzmann and Siderius, 2023). Building on this argument, this research explores whether and how ministerial logics—within social ministries—change over time. It argues that under a neoliberal and managerial policymaking paradigm, the internal logic of social ministries may shift: from a social logic to one focused on efficiency. Several key mechanisms of change are proposed: First, the turn to privatization and outsourcing has expanded the market-making role of social ministries, requiring adoption of new policy instruments, professional roles, and altering their immediate stakeholder environments. Second, the growing power of finance ministries in shaping policy (Craig, 2020) may compel social ministries to align with efficiency logics to advance their agendas. While these processes may not constitute a complete transformation of ministerial logics, they do suggest a context of contested ministerial logics, where the dominance of a particular internal logic is contingent and unstable. This research develops and tests this argument through the cases of two social ministries in two countries: Israeli social ministries: the Ministry of Welfare and Social Services (MoW) and the Ministry of Health (MoH); and UK Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) and Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), using a mixed-methods approach. First, it conducts a year-by-year comparison of the staffing structures in both ministries over the past 25 years, to track the development of units reflecting an “efficiency logic.” Second, it undertakes comprehensive textual analysis of ministerial representatives’ speech across venues and media to detect shifts in discourse—used here as a proxy for shifts in internal logic. Finally, interviews with senior officials in both ministries assess how these dynamics have shaped each ministry’s operational logic.