‘What counts is what works’? New Labour and partnerships in public health

Abstract

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. 'What Counts is What Works'? New Labour and Partnerships in Public HealthNeil Perkins, Katherine Smith, David J Hunter, Clare Bambra, Kerry Joyce. Durham UniversityKey words: partnership, public health, health inequalities.Word count: 7,998. AbstractPartnership working has been a central feature of New Labour"s approach to the delivery of health and social policy since 1997. A number of partnership based initiatives have centred on reducing health inequalities and improving health. This paper reports on the findings from a systematic review of the impact of partnership working on public health, and considers whether these partnerships have delivered better health outcomes for local/target populations.It finds that there is little evidence that partnerships have produced better health outcomes for local/target populations or reduced health inequalities.

Partnerships: survey respondents’ perceptions of inter-professional collaboration to address alcohol-related harms in England

“…These include features of the national and local policy contexts and local socio-economic settings; they include process factors -such as ensuring the effectiveness of leadership and the engagement of senior level members, information sharing and developing clear aims and objectives, access to sufficient time and resources to initiate and sustain change, as well as overcoming professional and organisational differences in priorities, power and culture. Partnerships are, therefore, very much a product of wider political, socio-economic determinants operating at both national and local levels (Geddes 2000, Wildridge et al 2004, Zacocs and Edwards 2006, Perkins et al 2010). …”

“…As in other policy areas, issues of developing common goals, setting agreed priorities for resource allocation and managing institutional and professional cultures are likely to present considerable barriers to successful partnership working, especially when cooperation is expected between a wide range of partnership networks, some of which have more mandatory underpinnings than others. (Wildridge et al 2004, Zacocs and Edwards 2006, Perkins et al 2010). In particular, previous studies have documented the resistance of professional 'tribes' to the behaviour changes needed for collaborative working (Beatty et al 2010) and have highlighted the complications for partnerships arising from members' involvement in competing markets and hierarchies within and between their organisations.…”

“…In the UK, with the election of New Labour in 1997, partnerships became a key mechanism for the delivery of central policy at local levels, underpinning a large number of health and 3 social care initiatives as part of the de-centralisation, or localisation, agenda (Peckham 2007, Smith et al 2009, Perkins et al 2010. Seen as a way of tackling what has been called 'wicked issues' -problems which are complex and cross traditional organisational boundaries (Wildridge et al 2004, p.6) -partnerships have become accepted and normalised as necessary and inevitable across programmes aimed at improving health and reducing health inequalities as well as in other policy areas (Health Development Agency 2000, Smith et al 2009, Beatty et al 2010.…”

Perceptions on the role of evidence: an English alcohol policy case study

“…This public health focus led to the development of 'universal' approaches including substance use education and public awareness campaigns, and more focused interventions such as community based detoxification and brief interventions (Lloyd, 2010). A second trend, in line with more general policy shifts, was towards the de-centralisation or localisation of policy, first to regional level and then to local level (Perkins et al, 2010) While increasing awareness of the impact of alcohol-related harm on the NHS was undoubtedly an important influence on policy, other forces were also at work. Stakeholder groups -which included researchers, public health professionals, the Royal Colleges, hospital A&E consultants and 'advocacy' charities such as Alcohol Concern were busy both producing and disseminating research and epidemiological data to support their demands for alcohol policy to address health issues to a greater extent.…”

Mapping the implementation of Children's Trust arrangements

“…The Labour government regarded partnerships as positive and desirable and espoused them in national social policy as the way to improve outcomes (Allnock et al, 2006;Ball et al, 2010;Balloch and Taylor, 2001;Glendinning et al, 2005;Perkins et al, 2010). Partnerships and multi-agency working continue to be promoted by the Coalition Government but with an apparently greater emphasis on local determination (DH, 2010(DH, , 2012DWP and DfE, 2011;Hudson, 2011).…”