Applied Policy, Institutions & Public Management

About this journal

1.0 Aims and Scope

Applied Policy, Institutions & Public Management (APIPM) publishes theoretically informed and empirically grounded scholarship on public policy, public administration, institutional performance and management of public organisations and programmes.

The journal focuses on how policies and institutions function in practice: how programmes are designed, implemented, financed, managed, evaluated and adapted; how administrative systems influence outcomes; and how public organisations respond to changing social, economic and technological conditions.

APIPM welcomes scholarship on policy implementation, institutional reform, public finance, public-sector management, programme evaluation, health policy, education policy, social policy, decentralisation, local government, regulation, public-service delivery, administrative capacity, accountability, digital government and AI in public administration.

The journal seeks to bridge research and practice. It therefore values studies capable of identifying not merely whether an intervention or institution appears effective, but why outcomes differ across contexts, which implementation mechanisms matter and what limitations affect the transferability of findings.

1.1 Core Research Areas

Core areas include public administration; institutional design and reform; policy implementation; implementation science in public programmes; programme and policy evaluation; public financial management; budgeting; public-sector performance; public procurement; decentralisation; local governance; accountability; regulatory governance; civil-service reform; organisational capacity; public leadership; service delivery; public-sector innovation; digital government; artificial intelligence in public administration; health administration; education administration; and development policy.

1.2 Interdisciplinary and Emerging Areas

The journal welcomes work drawing on economics, political science, management, sociology, development studies, public health, education, data science and organisational studies where the principal contribution relates to policy, institutions or public management.

Emerging areas include algorithmic administration, AI-supported public decision-making, digital public services, adaptive governance, resilience of public institutions, evidence-use systems and data-driven public management.

2.0 Contributions We Welcome

APIPM welcomes Original Research, Reviews, Systematic Reviews where relevant, programme evaluations, comparative institutional studies, qualitative and mixed-methods research, Policy and Practice Articles, Perspectives, Case Studies and Editorials.

Submissions should state the policy or management problem clearly and distinguish empirical findings from normative recommendations.

2.1 Evidence and Methodological Expectations

Relevant approaches may include experimental and quasi-experimental evaluation, administrative-data analysis, surveys, interviews, case studies, comparative institutional analysis, process tracing, qualitative research, mixed methods, economic evaluation and implementation research.

Authors should explain institutional and policy context sufficiently for readers to determine whether findings are transferable to other settings.

3.0 Disciplinary Standards

Evaluation studies should specify the intervention, comparator where applicable, outcomes, implementation setting and analytical approach.

Claims of causality should match the research design. Observational association should not be presented as causal evidence without appropriate justification.

Studies using administrative records should address data provenance, completeness, confidentiality and governance.

3.1 Research Transparency

Authors should disclose relevant organisational, institutional, funding or political relationships where these could influence interpretation.

Qualitative and mixed-methods work should explain sampling, data collection, analytical approach and researcher positioning where appropriate.

4.0 Topics Outside Scope

APIPM does not normally consider partisan advocacy presented as scholarship; commentary unsupported by evidence; manuscripts concerned exclusively with electoral competition without a substantive public-policy or administrative question; purely descriptive institutional accounts without analytical contribution; or recommendations that substantially exceed the evidence presented.