That is a fascinating analysis in changing use of language by Dave Byrne -
such as social administration to social policy, and political administration
to political studies.  Seem to illustrate how sensitive and compliant most
of the academic community is to changes in the political climate - or at
least to the political vocabulary.  But let me point to a gap in the
analysis.

> If there was no planning then
> everything would be
> decided in  a 'pure' market with firms as providers and a
> public of atomized
> consumers. Interestingly, even with the retreat from fordist modes of
> delivery towards mixed economies of welfare, planning remains
> central in
> that resource allocations are determined by bodies other than ultimate
> consumers. The only possible exception is in schooling where 'parental
> choice' (very constrained in practice for most) delivers
> resources through
> formula funding. Here we find performance statistics used to
> inform consumer
> choice by ultimate consumers, a new and extremely important
> development in
> the public role of statistics

What exactly is the difference between resource allocation by statistics, or
capitation funding as it is called by Peter C Smith and Roy Carr-Hill, and
planning?

What exactly does planning add?    I had thought that participation was seen
as the desired alternative rather than the market.    The idea is that if
the *subjects* (not customers or consumers) of resource allocation, for
example, were well informed of the processes involved then the subjects
could play an active roles in determining the proper allocation.

I had imagined that this kind of participation justified a post-modern
approach to social policy such as that of my Open University colleagues.  If
you teach how the system works from many different perspectives there is no
need to be judgmental in any way about policy.   If students understand how
the system works and the associated ideologies/discourses then they can
actively participate in the area of social policy to the benefit of the
subjects of the policy.

I had imagined that this kind of participation also justified Ludi Simpson's
efforts to involve people with statistics at a local level.   If the
subjects of resource allocation understood the ways in which statistics are
used for resource allocation, if they were cognisant with the statistics and
the reality underlying the statistics, they could also participate in the
process of resource allocation in ways that would maximise the benefits to
the subjects of the resource allocation system.

So what happened to the idea of participation?

Ray Thomas, Social Sciences, Open University
Tel: 01908 679081 Fax 01908 550401
Email: [log in to unmask]
35 Passmore, Milton Keynes MK6 3DY

******************************************************
Please think before you press the 'Reply' button!   Note that if you press
the 'Reply' button your message will go the individual who posted this message
not to the list.  With many mailers you will have a 'Reply-to-All' button that
will send automatically to the list address of <[log in to unmask]>.  The
Radstats list is set up for public discussion so please be generous with your
thoughts and share them us all.
*******************************************************