'Reform' of the British national health service after the election of a labour government: Understanding the policy development process

The policy development process leading to the Labour government's white paper of December 1997—The new NHS: Modern, Dependable—is the focus of this project and the public policy development literature is used to aid in the understanding of this process. Policy makers who had been involved in the development of the white paper were interviewed in order to acquire a thorough understanding of who was involved in this process and how they produced the white paper. A theoretical framework is used that sorts policy development models into those that focus on knowledge and experience, and those which focus on politics and influence. This framework is central to understanding the evidence gathered from the individuals and associations that participated in this policy development process. The main research question to be asked in this project is to what extent do either of these sets of policy development models aid in understanding and explicating the process by which the Labour government's policies were developed. The interview evidence, along with published evidence, show that a clear pattern of policy change emerged from this policy development process, and the Knowledge-Experience and Politics-Influence policy making models both assist in understanding this process. The early stages of the policy development process were characterized as hierarchical and iterative, yet also very collaborative among those participating, with knowledge and experience being quite prevalent. At every point in the process, however, informal networks of political influence were used and noted to be quite prevalent by all of the individuals interviewed. The later stages of the process then became increasingly noninclusive, with decisions made by a select group of internal and external policy makers. These policy making models became an important tool with which to understand the policy development process. This Knowledge-Experience and Politics-Influence dichotomy of policy development models could therefore be useful in analyzing other types of policy development. ^

The transformation of a health care system: An ecology perspective

Beginning in the early 1980s, the health care system experienced momentous realignments. Fundamental changes in structures of traditional health care organizations, shifts in authority and relationships of professionals and institutions, and the increasing influence of managed care contributed to a relatively stable industry entering into a state of turbulence. The dynamics of these changes are recurring themes in the health services literature. The purpose of this dissertation was to examine the content of this literature over a defined time period and within the perspective of a theory of organizational change. ^ Using a theoretical framework based upon the organizational theory known as Organizational Ecology, secondary data from the period between 1983 and 1994 was reviewed. Analysis of the literature identified through a defined search methodology was focused upon determining the manner in which the literature characterized changes that were described. Using a model constructed from fundamentals of Organizational Ecology with which to structure an assessment of content, literature was summarized for the manner and extent of change in specific organizational forms and for the changes in emphasis by the environmental dynamics directing changes in the population of organizations. Although it was not the intent of the analysis to substantiate causal relationships between environmental resources selected as the determinants of organizational change and the observed changes in organizational forms, the structured review of content of the literature established a strong basis for inferring such a relationship. ^ The results of the integrative review of the literature and the power of the appraisal achieved through the theoretical framework constructed for the analysis indicate that there is considerable value in such an approach. An historical perspective on changes which have transformed the health care system developed within a defined organizational theory provide a unique insight into these changes and indicate the need for further development of such an analytical model. ^

A focused ethnographic study of community social capital

Social capital, a relatively new public health concept, represents the intangible resources embedded in social relationships that facilitate collective action. Current interest in the concept stems from empirical studies linking social capital with health outcomes. However, in order for social capital to function as a meaningful research variable, conceptual development aimed at refining the domains, attributes, and boundaries of the concept are needed. An existing framework of social capital (Uphoff, 2000), developed from studies in India, was selected for congruence with the inductive analysis of pilot data from a community that was unsuccessful at mobilizing collective action. This framework provided the underpinnings for a formal ethnographic research study designed to examine the components of social capital in a community that had successfully mobilized collective action. The specific aim of the ethnographic study was to examine the fittingness of Uphoff's framework in the contrasting American community. A contrasting context was purposefully selected to distinguish essential attributes of social capital from those that were specific to one community. Ethnographic data collection methods included participant observation, formal interviews, and public documents. Data was originally analyzed according to codes developed from Uphoff's theoretical framework. The results from this analysis were only partially satisfactory, indicating that the theoretical framework required refinement. The refinement of the coding system resulted in the emergence of an explanatory theory of social capital that was tested with the data collected from formal fieldwork. Although Uphoff's framework was useful, the refinement of the framework revealed, (1) trust as the dominant attribute of social capital, (2) efficacy of mutually beneficial collective action as the outcome indicator, (3) cognitive and structural domains more appropriately defined as the cultural norms of the community and group, and (4) a definition of social capital as the combination of the cognitive norms of the community and the structural norms of the group that are either constructive or destructive to the development of trust and the efficacy of mutually beneficial collective action. This explanatory framework holds increased pragmatic utility for public health practice and research. ^