Preparing a baseline from which to measure 'Big Society'
Lead Research Organisation:
University of Glasgow
Department Name: School of Medicine
Abstract
Big Society is a core element of the coalition government's policy and ideology. In essence, a Big Society is one in which citizens and communities take a vastly increased role in managing, shaping and delivering public services and the social and physical infrastructure of society. This project produced a 'blueprint' for measuring variation in capacity for, and participation in, Big Society. The measure would be for communities across the entire UK.
Our measure distinguished three 'domains' of influence over the development of Big Society: Individuals, Community and Regulatory Environment. We identified datasets that could characterise: attitudes to, and participation in, Big Society; existing infrastructure which might support its development; and the extent to which local resources and regulatory environments are supportive. We found many datasets which could contribute to the measure, but also that government had discontinued some of the most pertinent sources. We then set out a means of combining available data into a classification which would characterise different communities according to their capacity for and participation in Big Society.
We consulted with interested parties, including government, to create our blueprint. Once it was complete, we set out our ideas in a short animated film.
www.measuringbigsociety.org
Our measure distinguished three 'domains' of influence over the development of Big Society: Individuals, Community and Regulatory Environment. We identified datasets that could characterise: attitudes to, and participation in, Big Society; existing infrastructure which might support its development; and the extent to which local resources and regulatory environments are supportive. We found many datasets which could contribute to the measure, but also that government had discontinued some of the most pertinent sources. We then set out a means of combining available data into a classification which would characterise different communities according to their capacity for and participation in Big Society.
We consulted with interested parties, including government, to create our blueprint. Once it was complete, we set out our ideas in a short animated film.
www.measuringbigsociety.org
Organisations
| Description | Big Society is a core element of the coalition government's policy and ideology. In essence, a Big Society is one in which citizens and communities take a vastly increased role in managing, shaping and delivering public services and the social and physical infrastructure of society. This project produced a 'blueprint' for measuring variation in capacity for, and participation in, Big Society. The measure would be for communities across the entire UK. It is important to note that this project planned how such a measure would be created - we were not funded to actually create it. Our measure distinguished three 'domains' of influence over the development of Big Society: Individuals, Community and Regulatory Environment. We identified datasets that could characterise: attitudes to, and participation in, Big Society; existing infrastructure which might support its development; and the extent to which local resources and regulatory environments are supportive. We found many datasets which could contribute to the measure, but also that government had discontinued some of the most pertinent sources. We then set out a means of combining available data into a classification which would characterise different communities according to their capacity for and participation in Big Society. We consulted with interested parties, including government, to create our blueprint. Once it was complete, we set out our ideas in a short animated film (see www.measuringbigsociety.org). The difficulty in defining Big Society was a recurrent theme in the project. Different stakeholders held different views as to what it is, and therefore what would be important to measure. It would be possible to build a measure of capacity for, and participation in, some aspects of Big Society from existing secondary data sets. Such a measure might not satisfy all potential stakeholders, but it would provide information about the baseline position and subsequent development of what is intended to be a revolution in public service delivery. There are significant gaps in the data available to measure capacity for, and participation in, Big Society. The measure proposed here would require some estimation of data. Some data gaps are a direct consequence of government cutting surveys about community participation. It is anomalous that a government committed to cultivating a Big Society should simultaneously remove some of the best tools for assessing its success and impacts. |
| Exploitation Route | Our would be readily used by others as it provides a blueprint to create a measure of small area change in social participation and its antecedents, over time. We set out detailed plans for the construction of measures of Big Society which could be followed in full or in part by other academic teams. We think it unlikely that government itself would do this however, as it's public commitment to Big Society has waned markedly. |
| Sectors | Government, Democracy and Justice |
| URL | http://cresh.org.uk/cresh-themes/methodology/Measuring%20Big%20Society/ |
| Description | We presented the research direct to DCLG on two occasions, speaking to an audience of senior civil servants from a variety of departments including the Cabinet Office. We directly discussed with statisticians working for the government how a) our ideas might be used in practice, but also b) the necessity to retain or reestablish regular surveys of social participation within the UK. The research was also used to produce a website which invited public participation in the debate on Big Society, but which also disseminated our approach and ideas to how the progress of Big Society might be measured. At the time, the site was disseminated and discussed on Twitter. The site continues to be accessed and had about 100 views in the last year, despite the project ending in 2012. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2011 |
| Sector | Government, Democracy and Justice |
| Impact Types | Policy & public services |
| Description | Consultation with stakeholders |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | In seeking inputs to our research, we both improved its quality and stimulated debate about our approach and Big Society in general. Our approach to the task was influenced, but also our ability to explain our plans was improved |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |
| Description | ESRC/AHRC DCLG Workshop on Measuring the Big/Bigger Society in the Context of Localism |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | talk sparked questions, engagement and discussion and advertised our online resources and film Increased traffic to our Measuring Big Society website |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| Description | Measuring Big Society film |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Comment and participation from the public stimulated Public made comments on the notion of Big Society |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011,2012 |
| URL | http://measuringbigsociety.org |
| Description | Meeting with DCLG (Big Society Study) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Talk sparked debate, questioning, informed our own research development and informed the thinking of civil servants. Follow up contact and continued interest from the then civil servant responsible. Subsequent invitation to speak at further event. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |