Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-10T07:46:02.217Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From Democratic Consultation to User-employment: Shifting Institutional Embedding of Citizen Involvement in Health and Social Care

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2017

TONE ALM ANDREASSEN
TONE ALM ANDREASSEN*
Affiliation:
Care, health and welfare programme, Oslo and Akershus University College, POB 4, St.Olavs plass, 0103 Oslo, Norway email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Policies of citizen involvement in health and social care have given rise to a variety of organisational forms, which address citizens in different capacities and differ in their demands as to the representativeness, performance and competence of those involved. Apparently, the policies draw on different institutional logics. Based on extant studies, partly the author's own research from Norway, this article sheds light on three purposefully selected cases of citizen involvement. Two models of democratic consultation encompass a dominant model of involvement in Norway (advisory bodies of service users) and a model more prevalent in UK (panels of the general public). These are both embedded within a logic of democracy. A third emergent model of involvement is one in which citizens with experience as service users are engaged as workers in service providing organisations. This model resembles an idea of co-production. However, when involvement is organised as user-employment and paid work, the model rather seems rooted within the logic of the market – the labour market of service workers. The rise of this model suggests a shift in institutional embedding of citizen involvement. The analysis of these models provides a framework of distinguishing dimensions between different models of involvement.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 47 , Issue 1 , January 2018 , pp. 99 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aberbach, J. D. and Christensen, T. (2005), ‘Citizens and consumers: An NPM dilemma’, Public management review, 7 (2): 225–246.Google Scholar
Alapuro, R. and Stenius, H. (2010), Nordic associations in a European perspective. Baden-Baden: Nomos.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alm Andreassen, T. (2008), ‘‘Asymmetric mutuality’: User Involvement as a government - voluntary sector relationship in Norway’, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 37 (2): 281–299.Google Scholar
Alm Andreassen, T. (2009a), ‘The consumerism of ‘voice’ in Norwegian health policy and its dynamics in transformation of health service’, Public Money and Management, 29 (2): 117–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alm Andreassen, T. (2009b), ‘Velferdsfeltets rådsorganer - et flytende grenseland mellom stat og sivilsamfunn’, in Waldahl, R. H. and Enjolras, B. (eds) Frivillige organisasjoner og offentlig politikk, pp. 93–116. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Alm Andreassen, T., Breit, E. and Legard, S. (2014), ‘The making of ‘professional amateurs’: Professionalizing the voluntary work of service user representatives’, Acta Sociologica, 57 (4): 325–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alm Andreassen, T. (2015), ‘Reforming Social Services: The Institutional and Organisational Context of the HUSK Program’, Journal of Evidence-Informed Social Work, 12 (1): 32–49.Google Scholar
Andersen, J. H. (2010), Opfølgingsundersøgelse af storskalaprojektet Medarbejder med brugererfaring. København: Videnscenter for Socialpsykiatri.Google Scholar
Anker, J. and Halvorsen, R. (2007), ‘Claiming participation rights: social mobilization and citizenship in Denmark and Norway’, in Hvinden, B. and Johansson, H. (eds) Citizenship in Nordic Welfare States, pp. 97–111. London: Routledge, 2007.Google Scholar
Austin, M. and Johannessen, A. (2015), ‘Enhancing the quality of public social services through the involvement of users: The Norwegian HUSK projects’, Journal of Evidence-Informed Social Work, 12(1 (Special Issue)).Google Scholar
Baggott, R. and Jones, K. (2014), ‘The voluntary sector and health policy: The role of national level health consumer and patients' organisations in the UK’ Social Science & Medicine, 123: 202–209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnes, M. (1999), ‘Users as citizens: collective action and the local governance of welfare’, Social Policy & Administration, 33 (1): 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, M., Newman, J., Knops, A. and Sullivan, H. (2003), ‘Constituting “the Public” in Public Participation’, Public Administration, 81 (2): 379–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, M., Knops, A., Newman, J. and Sullivan, H. (2004), ‘Recent research: The micro-politics of deliberation: Case studies in public participation’, Contemporary Politics, 10 (2): 93–110.Google Scholar
Barnes, M., Newman, J. and Sullivan, H. (2007), Power, Participation and Political Renewal. Case Studies in Public Participation. Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
Battilana, J. and Lee, M. (2014), ‘Advancing Research on Hybrid Organising – Insights from the Study of Social Enterprises’, The Academy of Management Annals, 8 (1): 397–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beresford, P. (2002), ‘User Involvement in Research and Evaluation: Liberation or Regulation?’, Social Policy and Society, 1 (02): 95–105.Google Scholar
Biong, S., Fugletveit, R. and Lofthus, A.-M. (2012), Utdanningen medarbeider med brukererfaring i Nedre Buskerud: en forskningsbasert evaluering. Drammen: Fakultet for helsevitenskap, Høgskolen i Buskerud.Google Scholar
Bovaird, T., Van Ryzin, G. G., Loeffler, E. and Parrado, S. (2015), ‘Activating Citizens to Participate in Collective Co-Production of Public Services’, Journal of Social Policy, 44 (01): 1–23.Google Scholar
Brandsen, T. and Pestoff, V. (2006), ‘Co-production, the third sector and the delivery of public services’, Public Management Review, 8 (4): 493–501.Google Scholar
Callaghan, G. and Wistow, G. (2006), ‘Publics, patients, citizens, consumers? Power and decision making in primary health care’, Public Administration, 84 (3): 583–601.Google Scholar
Chinman, M., Young, A., Hassell, J. and Davidson, L. (2006), ‘Toward the Implementation of Mental Health Consumer Provider Services’, The Journal of Behavioral Health Services and Research, 33 (2): 176–195.Google Scholar
Christensen, T. and Lægreid, P. (2001), New public management: the transformation of ideas and practice. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Clarke, J., Newman, J. and Westmarland, L. (2008), ‘The Antagonisms of Choice: New Labour and the reform of public services’, Social Policy and Society, 7 (2): 245–253.Google Scholar
Coleman, A., Checkland, K. and Harrison, S. (2009), ‘Still Puzzling: Patient and Public Involvement in Commissioning’, Journal of Integrated Care, 17 (6): 23–30.Google Scholar
Davies, C., Barnett, E. and Wetherell, M. (2006), Citizens at the centre: deliberative participation in healthcare decisions. Clifton, Bristol, UK: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Dent, M. and Pahor, M. (2015), ‘Patient involvement in Europe – a comparative framework’, Journal of Health Organisation and Management, 29 (5): 546–555.Google Scholar
Eide, S. B. (2015), ‘Equal Collaboration in HUSK’, Journal of evidence-informed social work, 12 (1): 92–101.Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989), ‘Building theories from case study research’ Academy of management review, 14 (4): 532–550.Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. M. and Graebner, M. E. (2007), ‘Theory Building from Cases: Opportunities and Challenges’, The Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1): 25–32.Google Scholar
Enjolras, B. (2012), ‘Deliberative neo-corporatism in Norway: Towards a new institutional framework in local governance?’, in Bozzini, E. and Enjolras, B. (eds) Governing ambiguities: New forms of local governance and civil society, pp. 136–146. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Eriksson, E. and Jacobson, K. (2016), ‘Tension and Balance in Teaching “The Patient Perspective” to Mental Health Professionals’, in Gubrium, J. F., Alm Andreassen, T. and Koren Solvang, P. (eds) Reimagining the Human Service Relationship. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Fotaki, M. (2011), ‘Towards developing new partnerships in public services: Users as consumers, citizens and/or co-producers in health and social care in Enland and Sweden’, Public Administration, 89 (3): 933–955.Google Scholar
Friedland, R. and Alford, R. R. (1991), ‘Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions’, In Powell, W. W. and DiMaggio, P. J. (eds) The New Institutionalism in Organisational Analysis, pp. 232–263. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fung, A. and Wright, E. O. (2001), ‘Deepening Democracy: Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance’, Politics & Society, 29 (1): 5–41.Google Scholar
Gauvin, F.-P., Abelson, J., Giacomini, M., Eyles, J. and Lavis, J. N. (2010), ‘“It all depends”: Conceptualizing public involvement in the context of health technology assessment agencies’, Social Science & Medicine, 70 (10): 1518–1526.Google Scholar
Gjernes, T. and Bliksvær, T. (2011), Nye samarbeidsformer - nye læringsformer?: sluttrapport fra evalueringen av forsøket Høgskole- og universitetssosialkontor (HUSK), Bodø: Nordlandsforskning.Google Scholar
Greener, I. (2008), ‘Choice and Voice – A Review’, Social Policy and Society, 7 (2): 255–265.Google Scholar
Halvorsen, R. (2005), ‘The emergence of social movements by social security claimants’, in Goul Andersen, J., Guillemard, A.-M., Jensen, P. H. and Pfau-Effinger, B. (eds) The Changing face of welfare: consequences and outcomes from a citizenship perspective, pp. 239–254. Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, S. and Mort, M. (1998), ‘Which Champions, Which People? Public and User Involvement in Health Care as a Technology of Legitimation’, Social Policy & Administration, 32 (1): 60–70.Google Scholar
ILO. (2013), Regulating the Employment Relationship in Europe. Geneva: IL Office.Google Scholar
Learmonth, M., Martin, G. P. and Warwick, P. (2009), ‘Ordinary and effective: the Catch-22 in managing the public voice in health care?’, Health Expectations, 12 (1): 106–115.Google Scholar
Lijphart, A. (2012), Patterns of democracy: government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. 2nd ed. New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, G. P. (2008a), ‘‘Ordinary people only’: knowledge, representativeness, and the publics of public participation in healthcare’, Sociology of Health & Illness, 30 (1): 35–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, G. P. (2008b), ‘Representativeness, legitimacy and power in public involvement in health-service management’, Social Science & Medicine, 67 (11): 1757–1765.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, H. (2009), ‘What's in a name:‘client’,‘patient’,‘customer’,‘consumer’,‘expert by experience’,‘service user’—what's next?’, British Journal of Social Work, 39 (6): 1101–1117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLean, A. (2010), ‘The Mental Health Consumers/Survivors Movement in the United States’, in Scheid, T. L. and Brown, T. N. (eds) A Handbook for the Study of Mental Health, pp. 461–477. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W. and Rowan, B. (1977), ‘Institutionalized Organisations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony’, American Journal of Sociology, 83 (2): 340–363.Google Scholar
Michels, A. (2011), ‘Innovations in democratic governance: how does citizen participation contribute to a better democracy?’, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 77 (2): 275–293.Google Scholar
Natland, S. and Celik, H. D. (2015), ‘Service Users' Self-Narratives on Their Journey from Shame to Pride: Tales of Transition’, Journal of evidence-informed social work, 12 (1): 50–63.Google Scholar
Needham, C. (2008), ‘Realising the Potential of Co-production: Negotiating Improvements in Public Services’, Social Policy and Society, 7 (02): 221–231.Google Scholar
Newman, J., Barnes, M., Sullivan, H. and Knops, A. (2004), ‘Public Participation and Collaborative Governance’, Journal of Social Policy, 33 (02): 203–223.Google Scholar
Opedal, S., Rommetvedt, H. and Vrangbæk, K. (2012), ‘Organised Interests, Authority Structures and Political Influence: Danish and Norwegian Patient Groups Compared’, Scandinavian Political Studies, 35 (1): 1–21.Google Scholar
Perkins, R., Rinaldi, M. and Hardisty, J. (2010), ‘Harnessing the expertise of experience: Increasing access to employment within mental health services for people who have themselves experienced mental health problems’, Diversity in Health and Care, 7 (1): 13–21.Google Scholar
Pestoff, V. (2009), ‘Towards a Paradigm of Democratic Participation: Citizen Participation and Co‐production of Personal Social Services in Sweden’, Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 80 (2): 197–224.Google Scholar
Peters, B. G. and Pierre, J. (2003), ‘Introduction: The Role of Public Administration in Governing’, in Pierre, J. and Peters, B. G. (eds) Handbook of public administration, pp. 1–9: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollitt, C. (1998), ‘Improving the Quality of Social Services: New Opportunities for Participation?’, in Flösser, G. and Otto, H.-U. (eds) Towards More Democracy in Social Services. Models and Culture of Welfare, pp. 339–356. Berlin. New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Pollitt, C. and Bouckaert, G. (2004), Public management reform: a comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Reay, T. and Hinings, C. R. (2009), ‘Managing the Rivalry of Competing Institutional Logics’, Organisation Studies, 30 (6): 629–652.Google Scholar
Repper, J. and Carter, T. (2011), ‘A review of the literature on peer support in mental health services’, Journal of Mental Health, 20 (4): 392–411.Google Scholar
Rose, D. and Lucas, J. (2007), ‘The user and survivor movement in Europe’, in Knapp, M., McDaid, D., Mossialos, E. and Thornicroft, G. (eds) European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Series, Mental health policy and practice across Europe, pp. 336–355. Maidenhead: Open University Press. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Salamon, L. M. (2004), Global civil society: dimensions of the nonprofit sector. Volume two. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.Google Scholar
Salamon, L. M. (2010), ‘Putting the Civil Society Sector on the Economic Map of the World’, Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 81 (2): 167–210.Google Scholar
Seo, M.-G. and Creed, W. D. (2002), ‘Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: A dialectical perspective’, Academy of management review, 27 (2): 222–247.Google Scholar
Shakespeare, T. (1993), ‘Disabled People's Self-organisation: a new social movement?’, Disability, Handicap and Society, 8 (3): 249–264.Google Scholar
Thomas, J. C. (2013), ‘Citizen, customer, partner: Rethinking the place of the public in public management’, Public Administration Review, 73 (6): 786–796.Google Scholar
Thornton, P. and Ocasio, W. (2008), ‘Institutional Logics’, in Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Suddaby, R. and Sahlin, K. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Organisational Institutionalism, pp. 99–129. Los Angeles: SAGE.Google Scholar
Tritter, J. Q. and McCallum, A. (2006), ‘The snakes and ladders of user involvement: moving beyond Arnstein’, Health policy, 76 (2): 156–168.Google Scholar
Tritter, J. Q. (2009), ‘Revolution or evolution: the challenges of conceptualizing patient and public involvement in a consumerist world’, Health Expectations, 12 (3): 275–287.Google Scholar
Van De Bovenkamp, H. M., Trappenburg, M. J. and Grit, K. J. (2010), ‘Patient participation in collective healthcare decision making: the Dutch model’, Health Expectations, 13 (1): 73–85.Google Scholar
Van Gestel, N. and Hillebrand, B. (2011), ‘Explaining Stability and Change: The Rise and Fall of Logics in Pluralistic Fields’, Organisation Studies, 32 (2): 231–252.Google Scholar
Veronesi, G. and Keasey, K. (2013), ‘Patient and Public Participation in the English NHS: An assessment of experimental implementation processes’, Public Management Review, 17 (4): 543–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vrangbaek, K. (2015), ‘Patient involvement in Danish health care’, Journal of Health Organisation and Management, 29 (5): 611–624.Google Scholar
Walker, G. and Bryant, W. (2013), ‘Peer support in adult mental health services: A metasynthesis of qualitative findings’, Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 36 (1): 28.Google Scholar
Wijkström, F. and Zimmer, A. (2011), Nordic civil society at a Cross-roads: transforming the popular movement tradition. Baden Baden: Nomos verlag.Google Scholar
Wistow, G. and Barnes, M. (1993), ‘User Involvement in Community Care: Origins, Purposes and Applications’, Public Administration, 71 (3): 279–299.Google Scholar