Changing images of the State: overloaded, hollowed-out, congested
| Published date | 01 July 2000 |
| Author | Chris Skelcher |
| DOI | 10.1177/095207670001500302 |
| Date | 01 July 2000 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Changing
images
of
the
State:
overloaded,
hollowed-out,
congested
Chris
Skelcher
University
of
Birmingham
Abstract
Three
conceptualisations
of
the
UK's
state
are
identified:
the
overloaded
state
of
the
1960s/1970s;
the
hollowed-out
state
of
the
1980s/early
1990s;
the
congested
state
of
the
late
1990s.
In
this
latter
period
the
creation
of
collaborative
institu-
tions
has
become
a
core
strategy
in
all
areas
of
UK
public
policy.
This
rich
web
of
linkages
arose
in
response
to
the
problems
inherent
in
the
fragmentation
arising
from
hollowing-out.
The
resulting
partnerships
bring
together
public,
private,
voluntary
and
community
sector
actors.
They
operate
between
and
around
the
core
institutions
of
democratic
government.
These
tertiary
(partnership)
structures
have
complex
accountability
relationships
with
primary
(elected)
and
secondary
(appointed)
public
bodies,
as
well
as
with
other
actors.
The
example
of
Northshire
shows
how
inter-linked
strategic
and
specific
partnership
boards
create
an
alternative,
collaborative
governance
structure
for
a
locality
which
is
largely
outside
democratic
processes.
This
development
has
fundamental
implica-
tions
for
our
appreciation
of
the
institutional
framework
of
UK
government,
as
well
as
for
the
debate
about
and
practice
of
democratic
renewal.
Introduction
A
remarkable
transformation
has
taken
place
in
recent
years.
The
individualistic
market-based
solutions
to
the
problems
of
government,
so
loudly
trumpeted
in
the
two
decades
to
the
mid
1990s,
are
quietly
being
replaced
by
more
collabo-
rative
models
and
practices
of
social
organisation.
The
result
has
been
the
rapid
growth
of
'partnerships'
involving
a
wide
variety
of
actors
in
undertaking
an
extensive
range
of
programmes
across
the
public
policy
agenda.
This
flowering
of
collaborative
activity
has
generated
substantial
institutional
growth
in
the
spaces
between
and
around
the
established
structures
of
democratic
government.
It
has
profound
implications
for
the
ways
in
which
the
governance
of
the
UK
is
perceived
and
undertaken,
and
especially
for
the
articulation
of
democratic
accountability.
Public
Policy
and
Administration
Volume
15
No.
3
Autumn
2000
3
This
development
is
one
part
of
a
wider
redemption
of
the
public
sector
that
has
taken
place
since
the
mid
1990s.
Even
the
World
Bank,
which
had
for
many
years
employed
its
fiscal
muscle
to
impose
its
policy
of
structural
readjustment
(i.e.
less
government
and
the
stimulation
of
the
private
sector)
on
developing
countries,
has
now
rediscovered
the
value
of
governance
in
the
public
realm.
Its
recent
World
Development
Report
is
devoted
to
a
discussion
of
the
importance
of
reinvigorating
and
strengthening
the
structures
and
processes
of
government
(World
Bank
1997).
It
argues
firmly
for
governments
to
place
emphasis
on
building
institutional
capacity
for
policy-making
and
public
service
delivery,
tackling
corruption
and
facilitating
citizen
participation.
More
generally,
the
renewed
legitimacy
of
public
action
is
reflected
in
the
developing
academic
debate
about
governance
-
the
institutions
of
social
co-ordination
and
guidance
in
society
(Kooiman
1993;
Rhodes
1996).
This
article
examines
the
implications
of
this
shift
in
understanding
and
policy
prescription.
It
considers
at
a
theoretical level
the
changing
conceptions
of
the
state
-
with
a
particular
focus
on
the
UK.
Three
images
of
the
state
are
explored.
The
overloaded
state
reflects
the
pattern
of
governance
which
developed
in
the
welfare
state
era
of
the
1950s
to
1970s,
epitomised
by
large
bureaucracies,
expanding
agendas
for
public
action
and
growing
state
expendi-
tures.
The
hollowed-out
state
is
exemplified
in
the
subsequent
rise
of
new
public
management
and
market
ideology.
The
congested
state
is
reflective
of
the
current
period,
in
which
a
complex
of
networked
relationships
between
public,
private,
voluntary
and
community
actors
have
created
a
dense,
multi-layered
and
largely
impenetrable
structure
for
public
action.
The
paper
concludes
by
arguing
that
the
growth
of
the
congested
state
requires
a
fundamental
rethinking
of
the
way
in
which
the
institutional
framework
of
British
government
is
understood
and
managed.
The
overloaded
State
'Government
is
big
in
itself,
big
in
its
claims
upon
society's
resources
and
big
in
its
impact
upon
society....
Big
government
is
a
fact
of
life'.
So
wrote
Richard
Rose
(1984:
1)
in
the
introduction
to
his
analysis
of
large
government.
But
it
was
this
scale,
the
promises
it
offered
and
the
problems
it
generated
that
for
some
time
had
taxed
both
politicians
and
students
of
the
welfare
state.
Almost
a
decade
before
Rose's
analysis
the
BBC
broadcast
a
series
of
talks
in
its
Politics
Today
series
which
examined
the
question:
why
is
Britain
becoming
harder
to
govern?
This
was
a
time
of
industrial
unrest,
industrial
decline
and
a
developing
suspicion
on
the
part
of
the
public
that
the
promises
of
the
welfare
state
and
Keynsian
economic
management
were
not
producing
the
expected
results.
What
had
gone
wrong
with
government
in
Britain?
Five
pundits
were
arrayed
before
the
listening
audience
to
give
their
views.
Anthony
King,
in
his
introductory
talk,
argued
that
the
increasing
responsi-
bilities
of
the
public
sector
and
the
complex
nature
of
public
policy
cause-effect
relationships
('intractabilities')
were
creating
a
threat
to
the
legitimacy
of
government.
Government,
he
suggested,
was
overloaded
with
responsibilities
Public
Policy
and
Administration
Volume
15
No.
3
Autumn
2000
4
To continue reading
Request your trial