Assessing the Role of Increasing Choice in English Social Care Services

Dados Bibliográficos

ID2115290
AutoresMartin Stevens (0000-0001-7768-3426), Caroline Glendinning (University of York), Sally Jacob (0000-0002-6199-5748, University of Manchester), Sally Jacobs, Nicola Moran (0000-0002-6219-0394, University of York), David Challis (0000-0003-3231-1586, University of Manchester), Jill Manthorpe (0000-0001-9006-1410, King's College London), Jose-Luis Fernandez (0000-0002-4190-7341, London School of Economics and Political Science), Karen Jones (0000-0002-4787-6830, University of Kent), Mel Knapp (0000-0003-1427-0215, London School of Economics and Political Science), Martin Knapp, Ann Netten (University of Kent), Mark Wilberforce (0000-0001-6977-4483, University of Manchester)
Ano2011
Volume40
Fascículo2
Páginas257-274
Data de publicação2011-04-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoJournal of Social Policy (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0047-2794 • E-ISSN: 1469-7823
EditoraCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s004727941000111x
OpenAlexW2106176284
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas43
Referências citadas24

This article aims to explore the concept of choice in public service policy in England, illustrated through findings of the Individual Budgets (IB) evaluation. The evaluation tested the impact of IBs as a mechanism to increase choice of access to and commissioning of social care services around the individual through a randomised trial and explored the experiences and perspectives of key groups through a large set of interviews. The article presents a re-examination of these interview data, using three 'antagonisms of choice' proposed in the literature - choice and power relations, choice and equity, and choice and the public nature of decisions - as organising themes. The randomised trial found that IB holders perceived they had more control over their lives and appreciated the extra choice over use of services, albeit with variations by user group. However, problems of power relations, equity and the constraints implied by the public nature of decision-making were complicating and limiting factors in producing the benefits envisaged. The focus on choice in policy, especially as implemented by IBs, emphasises an individualistic approach. The findings suggest that addressing broader issues relating to power, equity and an understanding of the public nature of choice will be of value in realising more of the benefits of the policy

Business · Economic growth · Economics · Equity (law) · Focus group · Freedom of choice · Individualism · Limiting · Political science · Public economics · Public policy · Public relations · Social choice theory · Welfare economics · Engineering · Healthcare innovation and challenges · Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism · Marketing · Social Policy and Reform Studies