Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T00:22:13.068Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Innovations in Local Domiciliary Long-Term Care: From Libertarian Criticism to Normalisation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2014

Olivier Giraud ,
Barbara Lucas ,
Katrin Falk ,
Susanne Kümpers  and
Arnaud Lechevalier
Olivier Giraud
Affiliation:
Lise-Cnrs-Cnam, Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers E-mail: oligiraud@ymail.com
Barbara Lucas
Affiliation:
Social Work Faculty, Geneva (HETS), University of Applied Sciences, Western Switzerland(HES-SO) E-mail: Barbara.lucas@hesge.ch
Katrin Falk
Affiliation:
Institut für Gerontolische Forschung, Berlin E-mail: falk@igfberlin.de
Susanne Kümpers
Affiliation:
Department of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Applied Sciences, Fulda E-mail: Susanne.Kuempers@pg.hs-fulda.de
Arnaud Lechevalier
Affiliation:
Lise-Cnrs-Cnam, Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers E-mail: arnaudlechavalier@orange.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article assesses how social innovations in the field of local domiciliary long-term care are shaped and implemented. It proposes a mapping of innovations in terms of two structuring discourses that inform welfare state reforms: a libertarian and a neo-liberal discourse. It then provides an analysis of the concrete trajectories of three local innovations for elderly people in Hamburg (Germany), Edinburgh (Scotland) and Geneva (Switzerland). Theoretically, social innovation is considered as a discursive process of public problem redefinition and institutionalisation. New coalitions of new actors are formed along this double process, and these transform the original discourse of innovation. The comparative analysis of the three processes of institutionalisation of local innovation shows that, in the context of local policy making, social innovations inspired by a libertarian critique of the welfare state undergo differentiated processes of normalisation.

Keywords

Long-term carediscourseinstitutionalisationnormalisation
Type
Themed Section on Social Innovation and Social Policy
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , July 2014 , pp. 433 - 444
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

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

Béland, D. and Lecours, A. (2008) Nationalism and Social Policy: The Politics of Territorial Solidarity, Oxford: University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BEPA (2010) Empowering People, Driving Change: Social Innovation in the European Union, Luxembourg: European Union, Bureau of European Policy Advisers.Google Scholar
Beresford, P. and Croft, S. (1993) Citizen Involvement: A Practical Guide for Change, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Björngren Cuadra, C. and Cattacin, S. (eds.) (2007) Migration and Health: Difference Sensitivity from an Organisational Perspective, Malmö: IMER.Google Scholar
Bray, S. (2000) ‘Participation and involvement in social care: an overview’, in Kemshall, H. and Littlechild, R. (eds.), User Involvement and Participation in Social Care, London: Jessica Kingsley, pp. 9–28.Google Scholar
Evers, A. (1993) ‘The welfare mix approach: understanding the pluralism of welfare system’, in Evers, A. and Svetlik, I. (eds.), Balancing Pluralism: New Welfare Mixes in Care for the Elderly, Vienna: Avebury European Centre, pp. 3–32.Google Scholar
Evers, A. and Ewert, B. (2013) ‘How to approach social innovation: lessons from Berlin’, 1st International Conference on Public Policy, 26–28 June, Grenoble.Google Scholar
Falk, K., Giraud, O., Kümpers, S., Lechevalier, A. and Lucas, B. (2011) Policy Learning and Innovation in Local Regimes of Home-Based Care for the Elderly – Germany, Scotland, Switzerland, Research Program ‘L'aide au domicile des personnes fragiles à l'étranger’, Paris: MIRE-Drees-CNSA.Google Scholar
Fraser, N. (1990) ‘Struggle over needs: outline of a socialist-feminist critical theory of late-capitalist political culture’, in Gordon, L. (ed.), Women, the State, and Welfare: Historical and Theoretical Perspectives, Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, pp. 205–31.Google Scholar
Giraud, O. and Lucas, B. (forthcoming) ‘Care policy as a government of life: three models based on the Swiss case’, in Reddy, V., Meyer, S. and Thenji, T. (eds.), Care in Context: Transnational Gender Perspective, Cape Town: HRSC Press.Google Scholar
Glasby, J. (2007) Understanding Health and Social Care, Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
Hajer, M. A. (1997) The Politics of Environmental Discourse, Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancock, L., Mooney, G. and Neal, S. (2012) ‘Crisis social policy and the resilience of the concept of community’, Critical Social Policy, 32, 3, 323–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirst, P. (2000) ‘Democracy and governance’, in Pierre, J. (ed.), Debating Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 13–35.Google Scholar
Jenson, J. (1989) ‘Paradigm and political discourses: protective legislation in France and the United States before 1914’, Canadian Journal of Political Science, 22, 2, 235–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahroum, S. (2013) ‘Policy innovations: towards an analytic framework’, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 15, 2, 192–7.Google Scholar
Marques, C. S., Gerry, C., Diniz, F. and Ferreira, A. L. (2012) ‘Social innovation: determinant of the demand for high-quality institutional care by the elderly’, Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, 2, 2, 186–202.Google Scholar
Moore, M. and Hartley, J. (2008) ‘Innovations in governance’, Public Management Review, 10, 1, 3–20.Google Scholar
Moulaert, F., Martinelli, F., Swyngedouw, E. and Gonzalez, S. (2005) ‘Towards alternative model(s) of local innovation’, Urban Studies, 42, 11, 1969–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Obinger, H. (2010) ‘Switzerland: from Liberal to Conservative welfare state – a pattern of late maturation?’, in Obinger, H., Starke, P., Moser, J., Bogedan, C., Gindulis, E. and Liebfried, S. (eds.), Transformations of the Welfare State: Small Countries, Big Lessons, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 191–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD (2005) Long-Term Care for Older People, Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Pierre, J. (ed.) (2000) Debating Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ray, M. (2007) ‘Redressing the balance? The participation of older people in research’, in Bernard, M. and Scharf Thomas, T. (eds.), Critical Perspectives on Ageing Societies, Bristol: The Policy Press, pp. 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, E. (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edn, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Rothgang, H. (2010) ‘Social Insurance for Long-term Care: An Evaluation of the German Model’, Social Policy and Administration, 44, 4, 436–60.Google Scholar
Van Kersbergen, K. and Van Waarden, F. (2004) ‘Governance as a bridge between disciplines: cross-disciplinary inspiration regarding shifts in governance and problems of governability, accountability and legitimacy’, European Journal of Political Research, 43, 2, 143–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verleye, K. and Gemmel, P. (2011) ‘Innovation in the elderly care sector – at the edge of chaos’, Journal of Management and Marketing in Health Care, 4, 2, 122–8.Google Scholar