English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Do public administrators simultaneously enhance or trade off goals in public programs? Responding to stakeholders’ requests while facing limited budgets poses challenges for public decision-makers in fully improving all goals. This research explores the juxtaposition of conflicting or synergistic goals that administrators might encounter after revising a public program. Using Pennsylvania's Well Plugging Program as a case study, it demonstrates potential changes in goals related to energy site remediation when administrators adopt an objective approach to maximize policy outcomes. The findings indicate that the revised program is expected to increase benefits for impoverished populations near abandoned wells. However, administrators must navigate trade-offs, as the new program may prioritize plugging less environmentally risky wells not selected in the current program. This research sheds light on the simultaneous existence of conflicting and synergistic relations among multiple goals in public programs designed for socially optimal performances.

The concurrent existence of goal conflict and goal synergy in public programs: a case study of the Pennsylvania’s Well Plugging Program