This is a CTP of initiative: Spice (UK)
This CTP concerns the supportive operating context for Spice in Wales that arises from the devolution of powers to national assemblies, providing constituent countries of the UK with a high degree of self-governance, and from two innovative pieces of legislation introduced by the Welsh Assembly that frame the organization of public service delivery in Wales: the Social Service and Wellbeing Act (2014) and the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act (2015). Both acts aim to modernise and improve social services, re-invigorate communities, strengthen interpersonal relations, and empower citizens. The legislation, which is unique to Wales, creates opportunities for new approaches to implementing policy goals through preventive action and requires new ways of organizing public service delivery through co-production. This promotes experimenting and learning around co-production.
Under arrangements for the devolution of powers, Wales, as a constituent country of the United Kingdom, has a high degree of political autonomy. In relation to domestic matters, Wales has its own government and law making apparatus. On domestic matters, Welsh law can therefore differ significantly from English law. By comparison with England, Wales has a much smaller population. One aspect of this is that it is easier for a social innovation organisation, such as Spice, to obtain access to political decision makers in Wales than it is in England. This includes access to politicians that hold significant powers owing to the high degree of political autonomy that Wales enjoys.
In 2014, the Welsh Assembly, the national government of Wales, introduced the Social Service and Wellbeing Act. This came into force in April 2016. The aim of the Act is to enable a co-production of social services between professional service providers and service users. In 2015, the Welsh Assembly further enacted The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act. This is concerned with “improving the social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of Wales.” The Act imposes a legal duty on several public agents and bodies to take seven wellbeing goals into account when developing and implementing policy: a globally responsible Wales, a prosperous Wales, a resilient Wales, a healthier Wales, a more equal Wales, a Wales of cohesive communities, and a Wales of vibrant culture and thriving Welsh language. The concerned bodies have to adjust their political decisions to ensure these align with the wellbeing of future generations.
Both Acts have positive impacts by altering the political environment and opportunity context for Spice in Wales. The Social Services and Wellbeing Act has the more clear-cut impact, since this already makes co-production a cornerstone of Welsh policy. The Act advances the concept of co-production and, by implication enhances the reputation and legitimacy of co-production and its advocates and practitioners, such as Spice, as well as creates opportunities for them as partners in organising individual and community participation as co-producers of wellbeing and in building the infrastructure of prevention called for by the Act.
The Wellbeing of Future Generations Act is, also, positive in principle. It is very recent and the extent and nature of its impact will only become clear in time. In principle, the Act is very progressive, since it demands that public service bodies think about and manage their impact on future generations. “Each public service body has to provide a wellbeing plan saying precisely how it is going to influence the wellbeing of this and future generations in term of the decisions it makes. They [public service bodies] have to set goals and they will be measured against them. Collaboration and citizen voice are locked deeply into that. All this is quite new, so I think we're still seeing it coming through the system. But I guess the point is it's already seen on the radar of service providers and commissioners. This is something they can't ignore.”
Several factors have influenced legislative change, including growth in the demand for social services and constraints on public budgets following the economic downturn post 2008. These have put public services under increasing pressure.
Organizations like Spice have pushed for co-production. “Every year we have pushed. I remember when I first started to work for Spice and we talked about co-production and people looked [at us] like some kind of loony fringe, some ‘off the wall’ political ideology.” The fact is that in a small country with a high degree of political autonomy, it is easier to reach politicians, to introduce them to co-production advocates, to have those conversations and thereby to influence policy. “There is a gap between an understanding of what has to happen and how it is going to happen. But nevertheless, the conversations you can have throughout government and civil service here [in Wales] are very different than the ones that you would have in England.”
The concept of co-production emerged in the 1970s. The expression was first used by Elinor Ostrom and the concept has since been developed and applied in different arenas. It has gained increasing political attention owing to the growing challenges facing conventional delivery arrangements. Co-production was taken up by timebanking proponents early on in the history of timebanking and it became a central concept in the theorising of timebanking. Books and reports about the concept were written by Edgar Cahn and by David Boyle. The concept was an integral element of timebanking theory, including the theories of change proposed by timebanking proponents. Its political relevance has increased as the challenges facing traditional social service delivery have grown owing to crises of public finance and rapidly increasing demand on social services, trends that are inconsistent and widely seen as unsustainable. In this context, the Welsh government, influenced in part by co-production protagonists has taken up this concept in efforts to improve and modernise (reinvigorate) public service delivery.
There has been little open contestation over the shift in policy approach to the organisation of social services in Wales. The main issues are concerned with modes of delivery and the logistics and practical feasibility of organising co-production in social services. Past efforts to reform large social service delivery organisations in other parts of the UK, such as the NHS in its various organisational forms, have encountered resistance. It is too early to say whether the current efforts in Wales will be more successful.
Nevertheless, this political development is aligned with Spice ideologically and in terms of the Spice ‘people-to-agency’ mechanism, so Spice is well-positioned to benefit from the favourable policy context these Acts provide. Although this is an external decision of policy makers, Spice has lobbied for this development. Preventive approaches and co-production represent new drivers for meaningful change within communities and services delivery. The new legislation is aligned with the values and principles of Spice and supports its operations, which involve connecting people with organisations. Spice (as an organisation) is likely to be further empowered by these developments and to be a beneficiary of new funding streams and new commissions that the legislation makes possible.
Economic deprivation, decreasing public budgets and increasing demand for social services have created the need for reforming social care and wellbeing legislation. Co-production has long been part of the theory of change of those in the timebanking movement. Spice, with its origins in timebanking, has worked consistently to promote and lobby policy makers about co-production.
The specifics of Wales have made it easier for Spice to have policy impact there than would have been the case had Spice been seeking to influence policy in England. “Here in Wales it is a very different policy environment in the sense of access to the Welsh government. All of Wales is only as big as some of the bigger local authorities in England… and getting access to ministers, to power, is that much easier. I think in England it is really tough to climb high enough up that pole to influence the influencers.”
Changes in legislation are external factors that may benefit as well as hinder the operations of social innovation organizations. In regards to Spice, recent changes of legislation in Wales are favourable for the organization. It is too early yet to see what the new Acts may lead to in terms of meaningful change. The learning achieved so far has mostly concerned the advantages that a small country context can offer when the need is to influence policy paradigms and to get new ideas into the framing legislation and, to some extent, how to lobby effectively in such a context. “All this is quite new. Whether it will create meaningful change is yet to be seen.” However, the exposure to policy makers is changing the policy conversation at all levels of government and Spice is learning by experience about how to lobby and influence the policy discourse and how to integrate Spice into policy development processes.
Stay informed. Subscribe for project updates by e-mail.
