Accountabilities in the NHS: Coercion, Finance and Responsibility

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This article is based on ethnographic fieldwork carried out with managers, politicians and political activists in the English public healthcare system. Rather than a dominance of financial accountability, I found a mish-mash of accountabilities, in which the duty to ‘balance the books’ was a key driver but one that relied on other forms of coercion. Campaigners mobilised the concept of political accountability against cuts and privatisation. While bureaucrats were often sympathetic to activists’ point of view, they felt constrained by ‘the reality’ of limited funds. Their conceptualisations of what was possible were enclosed. Debate regarding those limits was foreclosed. I sketch these limits on bureaucrats’ ethical imagination, theorising them as ideological closure. But at times, managers did imagine alternative possibilities. Mostly, they kept quiet regarding alternatives due to a fear of losing their jobs. Thus, corporate accountability – to one's employer – enforced service retrenchment in the name of financial accountability.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)118-136
Number of pages19
JournalCambridge Journal of Anthropology
Volume41
Issue number1
Early online date1 Mar 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2023

Keywords

  • accountability
  • activism
  • audit
  • bureaucracy
  • healthcare
  • morality
  • privatisation
  • responsibility

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Accountabilities in the NHS: Coercion, Finance and Responsibility'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this