Contesting the austerity and “welfare reform” narrative of the UK Government

Abstract

Edinburgh Research ExplorerContesting the austerity and 'welfare reform' narrative of the UK Government Citation for published version: Wiggan, J 2017, 'Contesting the austerity and 'welfare reform' narrative of the UK Government: Forging a social democratic imaginary in Scotland' International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, vol. 37, no. 11/12, General rightsCopyright for the publications made accessible via the Edinburgh Research Explorer is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policyThe University of Edinburgh has made every reasonable effort to ensure that Edinburgh Research Explorer content complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please contact openaccess@ed.ac.uk providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. The narrative of successive UK Governments is that austerity and punitive welfare reform is necessary. This paper examines how the Scottish Government has articulated and communicated a counter hegemonic welfare state imaginary and unpacks the concepts and traditions it draws upon. Design/methodology/approachThe study draws together a decentred governance perspective that emphasises ideational tradition for understanding (re)construction of governance (Bevir, 2013: 27) with a Critical Discourse Analysis method to examine how particular welfare interpretations and representations are carried into the policy and public arena. Scottish Government documents are deconstructed to interrogate the ideas and form of the emergent social democratic discourse and its relation to the Independence Referendum and shifting welfare governance. FindingsIn response to changing socio-economic-political contexts the Scottish Government has developed a distinct discourse of welfare modernisation. Fusing (civic) nationalism with social wage and social investment concepts rooted in British and Scandinavian social democratic traditions, their discourse conjures up imaginaries of a credible prosperous, egalitarian welfare state future. Depictions of poverty and weak economic performance as originating in welfare structures and claimants' agency are reinterpreted as consequences of the maldistribution of power and resources between groups and constituent countries of the UK. Originality/valueThe paper provides original analysis of the discourse used to communicate the ideas and traditions underlying the Scottish Government's welfare state vision. It is of value to those interested in how a social democratic governing party within an ostensibly liberal welfare regime has renewed its approach through weaving together particular social democratic concepts.1

Policy Boostering the Social Impact Investment Market in the UK

“…To operationalise examination of the impact investing discourse of UK Governments between 2011 and 2016 I use Hyatt's (2013a; 2013b) CPDAF (see Wiggan, 2017). The CPDAF draws together various critical discourse techniques to provide a toolkit for policy analysts seeking a theoretically informed but pragmatic means to conduct a transparent and systematic multi-pronged examination of a policy discourse and its relationship to policy action and orientation (Wiggan, 2017).…”

“…To operationalise examination of the impact investing discourse of UK Governments between 2011 and 2016 I use Hyatt's (2013a; 2013b) CPDAF (see Wiggan, 2017). The CPDAF draws together various critical discourse techniques to provide a toolkit for policy analysts seeking a theoretically informed but pragmatic means to conduct a transparent and systematic multi-pronged examination of a policy discourse and its relationship to policy action and orientation (Wiggan, 2017). Disaggregating analysis into two distinct but related components – contextualisation and deconstruction of policy (Hyatt, 2013a: 43; 2013b: 834) – a layered analysis is encouraged that is empirically grounded in the text but informed by and linked to the broad policy context.…”

“…The accountability warrant is attuned to the policy and social consequences of (in)action, where the case for a given policy is constructed in relation to what it will achieve or the negative outcomes likely if reform is obstructed. Finally, the evidentiary warrant is where policymakers situate their policy choice as credible, necessary and desirable by grounding it in an ostensibly neutral, objective reading of empirical material (Hyatt, 2013b: 839; 2013a: 50–52; Wiggan, 2017).…”

“…Inscribed evaluation refers to how a positive or negative assessment is explicitly written into a text. Conversely, evoked evaluation refers to how a text seeks to prime the reader to draw a particular conclusion, or conjure up an image, without making the position of the author clear (Hyatt, 2013a: 51–55; Hyatt, 2013b: 839–842; Wiggan, 2017: 643). The CPDAF also incorporates the idea of four distinct Modes of legitimation drawn from Fairclough's (cited in Hyatt, 2013b: 840) work.…”

“…The CPDAF also incorporates the idea of four distinct Modes of legitimation drawn from Fairclough's (cited in Hyatt, 2013b: 840) work. These include appeals to legitimacy rooted in the authority of the author (authorisation); to social utility (rationalisation); to political or societal definitions of desirable values (moral evaluation), and/or stories of the consequences that accompany particular choices and actions (narrative) (Wiggan, 2017: 644).…”