Public services, co-ordination and the creation of capability: Noel Whiteside Warwick University

Theoretical perspective: development of capability as policy Sen and instrumental freedoms (1999): –Political freedom –Economic facilities –Protective security –Social opportunity & transparency guarantees Equitable access to collective resources as public services for all –Freedom of movement or from disease not amenable to individual action –Example of employment services.

Labour market governance and co- ordination Practical policy problems EES: raising participation –Targets and benchmarks (OMC) –National / EU imposed directives –Lack of local co-ordination + accountability PES: privatisations of service delivery –‘Cherry picking’ via payment by results. –Further fracturing of co-ordination

Historical precedent Late 19 th century posed similar questions –‘first wave’ globalisation (inc. investment) –Technical revolution in information services –Transformation employment –Imperative to modernise urban environments Emergence PES (labour bureaux) –To integrate organised labour –To facilitate placement of ‘unemployed’ –To raise economic preformance –To reduce reliance on public funds [according construction of the ‘social question’]

Using CA to compare Strasbourg and Liverpool pre Historical detail in paper Both cities utilise labour bureaux as PES Strasbourg emerges as a paradigm of success: Liverpool imitation totally fails. Paper concludes that this reflects more than local labour market differences –S builds from bottom up: L from top down –Conventions of labour market governance determine acceptance of new initiative

Conclusions 1: the myth of ‘best practice’ ‘Policy learning’ discourses require scepticism. Institutional transfer fails –Institutions embody varied objectives –Need for negotiated compromise Public sphere not a common space: meanings of ‘modernisation’: –Promotion of technical competence –Promotion of free competition via markets –Promotion of democratic decision-making

Conclusions 2: from employability towards capability Liverpool: PES aims to rationalise casual employment: create normative work-week –Eradication collective work practices –Imposition bureaucratic surveillance (registration) Strasbourg: PES as locally integrated agency –Labour representation at all levels –Liquidity of classification / treatment –[refer back to Sen’s ‘instrumental freedoms’] Weakness ‘top down’ policy strategy.

Conclusion 3: personal freedom Strasbourg: –freedom of job seeker to refer to exchange –Obligation on employers to use exchange Liverpool: –Employers and men register –Employer freedom to hire/ fire remains –Exchange identifies (+ removes) irregular men

Conclusion 4: public services combine social + economic policy 19 th century context: labour agencies are one of multitude local state interventions –Public posts and telecommunications –Public transport (trams) –Sanitation / water supply –Street cleansing / lighting –Efficient power supply [electricity and gas] ‘public-private partnerships’ – contractual supply Interdependence of interventions to secure commercial success and social stability of global cities [a critique of Esping-Andersen’s narrow view on constitution of ‘social policy’]