Search results

AbstractIn this article, I introduce the framework of 'big G' (categorical) and 'small g' (process) gender to explore the varied ways in which actors in Victoria's family violence policy subsystem talk about and understand gender. I explain why such varied definitions of gender pose a problem for domestic and family violence (DFV) advocates, and how big G definitions might be associated with reluctance to accept gendered explanations for DFV. Conversely, I show how small g definitions (coupled with an analysis of power in relationships) can help us appreciate the way gender influences a variety of forms of DFV, and thus understand how to address the problem. Lastly, I use examples from interviews with policy actors to connect participants' understanding of gender with their attitudes to the role of gender in DFV, and discuss the practical and theoretical implications of my research for feminist DFV advocates and policymakers.

The 2015-16 Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence was an important site for contestation over the framing of domestic and family violence (DFV). It had a powerful effect on DFV policy in Victoria; the Government accepted all 227 recommendations and committed significant funding to their implementation. In this thesis, I employ a feminist interpretive approach, using critical frame analysis to uncover where and how gender was included in problem framing at the Commission. In the context of fierce public and scholarly debate about the problem definition and appropriate policy prescriptions, my research considers: how did key policy actors frame the problem of DFV in their contributions to the Commission? How did the Commission frame the problem in its report and recommendations? What understanding of gender seemed to predominate? Using an embedded case study design, I focus on four themes that concern individual risk factors or particular population groups: alcohol and other drugs, mental health, children, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. As the thesis outlines, through these themes it is possible to identify intersectional concerns that complicate a traditional gender power analysis of DFV. My findings indicate that the Commission and many of its contributors framed DFV as largely a problem of male perpetrators and female victims. However, structural gender inequality framing was rare in the dataset. Further, an awareness of gender asymmetry in perpetration often occurred as part of a women-centred problem framing that did not explicitly interrogate deeper gendered conditions underlying DFV. As a result, I suggest that an understanding of gender as process rather than only as category could be useful in a 'family violence' policy environment where the problem diagnosis includes violence between all family members. This is firstly because gender as process retains a gendered analysis without only signifying men and women and the power imbalances between them, and secondly because ...

AbstractThe National Disability Scheme began implementation in 2013 and in this article we reflect on its first decade. We explore why the National Disability Scheme was introduced and key design elements of the scheme before examining significant areas of debates that have emerged over this period, namely: co‐design of the scheme with people with disability; scheme costs; Tier 2 services; administrative burden and its unequal impact on different groups of participants; and market stewardship. We argue that many people accessing the NDIS have seen their lives transformed in a positive sense, but this is not the case for all and there remain some significant challenges with the scheme. The paper concludes by looking ahead and thinking about what might happen next for the NDIS to realise its full potential for all participants.

ABSTRACTIn this article we conceptualise the public inquiry as a procedural tool and address the question of what makes a public inquiry an effective policy instrument. The issue of control is central to our arguments. In our conceptual work, we use control as a means of introducing the concept of the 'catalytic procedural tool' to better capture the variance in autonomy, location and function that can be associated with different inquiries. In our evaluative work, we use control as a means of analysing the effectiveness of an inquiry as a procedural tool, which centres on a capacity to build legitimacy and prospectively influence the implementation and institutionalisation of recommendations. We conclude by claiming that there is value in thinking about control as a means of understanding policy instruments because it can deliver insights into their effects once they leave the design table and enter a variety of technical, political and social environments.

Abstract
While Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID‐19) does not discriminate against particular groups, our social structures and systems mean some people are more at risk in a pandemic context—from both the disease and the social and policy responses to the pandemic. This is particularly so for people with disability, in part because they often have poorer health outcomes from underlying conditions but also due to discrimination and social exclusion. Here, we draw from a survey about the impacts of the COVID‐19 pandemic on Australian children and young people with disability and their families. Respondents faced a range of inequities prior to the pandemic, and COVID‐19 has further exposed and often exacerbated them. We conclude that recent developments in the Australian disability context to personalize services have arguably made people with disability and their families less safe within a pandemic context, and we outline some ways in which these issues might be addressed.

This article adds to the emerging empirical literature on citizen co‐production. Based on a telephone survey of 1000 Australian adults, it replicates a five‐country European study focusing on three policy domains: neighbourhood safety, environment, and health (Loeffler et al. 2008). It shows that individually performed and closely reciprocal activities with high levels of private value are performed the most often, whereas group activities producing mainly public value are the least performed. We found no evidence of a relationship between service satisfaction and co‐production, or between information provision/inclusion/consultation and co‐production, which challenges some of the previous literature on what might motivate citizens to co‐produce. Citizen self‐efficacy has a modest relationship with co‐production levels in each of the three policy domains. These findings have implications for policymakers, and pave the way for future empirical research in this field.

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to add to the analytic toolkit of public sector practitioners by outlining a framework called Public Value Process Mapping (PVPM). This approach is designed to be more comprehensive than extant frameworks in either the private or public sectors, encapsulating multiple dimensions of productive processes.Design/methodology/approach– This paper explores the public administration and management literature to identify the major frameworks for visualising complex systems or processes, and a series of dimensions against which they can be compared. It then puts forward a more comprehensive framework – PVPM – and demonstrates its possible use with the example of Indigenous child nutrition in remote Australia. The benefits and limitations of the technique are then considered.Findings– First, extant process mapping frameworks each have some but not all of the features necessary to encompass certain dimensions of generic or public sector processes, such as: service-dominant logic; external as well internal providers; public and private value; and state coercive power. Second, PVPM can encompass the various dimensions more comprehensively, enabling visualisation of both the big picture and the fine detail of public value-creating processes. Third, PVPM has benefits – such as helping unearth opportunities or culprits affecting processes – as well as limitations – such as demonstrating causation and delineating the boundaries of maps.Practical implications– PVPM has a number of uses for policy analysts and public managers: it keeps the focus on outcomes; it can unearth a variety of processes and actors, some of them not immediately obvious; it can help to identify key processes and actors; it can help to identify the "real" culprits behind negative outcomes; and it highlights situations where multiple causes are at work.Originality/value– This approach, which draws on a number of precursors but constitutes a novel technique in the public sector context, enables the identification and to some extent the comprehension of a broader range of causal factors and actors. This heightens the possibility of imagining innovative solutions to difficult public policy issues, and alternative ways of delivering public services.

AbstractTraining and supervision of disability support workers (DSWs) has, in most developed countries, been the primary means of supporting quality of service, adequate worker skill and prevention of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation of both service users and DSWs. However, in Australia, there is no requirement for DSWs to obtain a minimum level qualification. This paper examines service user perception and decision making in relation to training and supervision of their DSWs. We report findings from semi‐structured interviews with 30 National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) participants. These findings suggest that users of disability services do not universally prioritise formal DSW supervision and training. Many interviewees described that being able to train and supervise DSWs themselves achieved better support outcomes and reduced power differentials in receipt of services. We discuss the implications of these findings in the context of recent policy reviews and the need to refocus safeguarding schemes on providing people with disability with the tools they need to ensure the quality and safety of their services.