‘We're trying to get out of here, that's what we're doing’: A Bourdieusian examination of ‘choice’ in the National Disability Insurance Scheme

IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Elroy Dearn, Paul Ramcharan
{"title":"‘We're trying to get out of here, that's what we're doing’: A Bourdieusian examination of ‘choice’ in the National Disability Insurance Scheme","authors":"Elroy Dearn, Paul Ramcharan","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12660","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<jats:label/>The notion of choice underpinning Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has its origin in neoliberal assumptions about the inherent value of market choice in human services reform and in the disability movement's advocacy for the right to self‐determination. Little is known about how people in institutional settings experience choice in the NDIS context. Based on a critical ethnographic study, this article explores the choices made by 12 people with psychosocial disability living in two Victorian supported residential services (SRS). The study found that despite the goal of most participants being to move into independent accommodation, 2 years after the start of the roll‐out of the NDIS, most participants were still living in SRS. Adopting a Bourdieusian conceptual framework, we show that the choices participants made were constrained by the institutional field in which they were living, their low capitals, and their relative powerlessness. This novel application of the concepts of field, habitus, and capitals in the NDIS context has implications for debates about the impact of marketisation and personalisation on individuals with limited agency. The findings have implications for policy and practice in other institutional settings and jurisdictions where public service delivery is framed around the notion of choice.Points for practitioners<jats:list list-type=\"bullet\"> <jats:list-item>This research shows that a key choice for residents with psychosocial disability living in SRS was to move into independent housing. However, choice over their housing goals was constrained by living in an institutional setting and their relative powerlessness.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Residents in these settings and NDIS participants living in other segregated institutional settings will need independent housing and living navigators if they are to find pathways into independent housing.</jats:list-item> </jats:list>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12660","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The notion of choice underpinning Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has its origin in neoliberal assumptions about the inherent value of market choice in human services reform and in the disability movement's advocacy for the right to self‐determination. Little is known about how people in institutional settings experience choice in the NDIS context. Based on a critical ethnographic study, this article explores the choices made by 12 people with psychosocial disability living in two Victorian supported residential services (SRS). The study found that despite the goal of most participants being to move into independent accommodation, 2 years after the start of the roll‐out of the NDIS, most participants were still living in SRS. Adopting a Bourdieusian conceptual framework, we show that the choices participants made were constrained by the institutional field in which they were living, their low capitals, and their relative powerlessness. This novel application of the concepts of field, habitus, and capitals in the NDIS context has implications for debates about the impact of marketisation and personalisation on individuals with limited agency. The findings have implications for policy and practice in other institutional settings and jurisdictions where public service delivery is framed around the notion of choice.Points for practitioners This research shows that a key choice for residents with psychosocial disability living in SRS was to move into independent housing. However, choice over their housing goals was constrained by living in an institutional setting and their relative powerlessness. Residents in these settings and NDIS participants living in other segregated institutional settings will need independent housing and living navigators if they are to find pathways into independent housing.
我们试图离开这里,这就是我们正在做的":布尔迪厄斯对国家残疾保险计划中 "选择 "的研究
澳大利亚国家伤残保险计划(NDIS)中的选择概念源于新自由主义关于人类服务改革中市场选择固有价值的假设,以及残疾人运动对自决权的倡导。在 NDIS 的背景下,人们对机构环境中的人们如何体验选择知之甚少。本文以一项批判性人种学研究为基础,探讨了生活在维多利亚州两家辅助居住服务机构(SRS)中的 12 名社会心理残疾人士的选择。研究发现,尽管大多数参与者的目标是搬到独立的住所,但在 NDIS 开始推出两年后,大多数参与者仍然住在 SRS 中。我们采用布尔迪厄斯(Bourdieusian)的概念框架,表明参与者的选择受到他们所处的制度领域、他们的低资本以及他们的相对无力感的制约。在 NDIS 背景下对领域、习惯和资本等概念的这一新颖应用,对有关市场化和个性化对代理权有限的个人的影响的讨论具有重要意义。研究结果对其他以选择概念为框架提供公共服务的机构环境和司法管辖区的政策和实践也有影响。然而,他们对住房目标的选择受到了居住在机构环境中和相对无权的限制。这些环境中的居民以及生活在其他隔离机构环境中的 NDIS 参与者需要独立住房和生活导航员,这样他们才能找到进入独立住房的途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Aimed at a diverse readership, the Australian Journal of Public Administration is committed to the study and practice of public administration, public management and policy making. It encourages research, reflection and commentary amongst those interested in a range of public sector settings - federal, state, local and inter-governmental. The journal focuses on Australian concerns, but welcomes manuscripts relating to international developments of relevance to Australian experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信