Narratives of voluntary action as discursive interventions across moving frontiers

• In Event: Narrating and Naming the Voluntary Sector in the UK and US: Stories Across Time

Abstract

During periods of unsettlement, debates debate about the role and contribution of voluntary action seem particularly intense. During the 2010s the scale and extent of the changes underway to the provision of welfare services dwarfed earlier reforms, leading some to argue that not since the 1940s had we seen such a reordering of relationships between the state and voluntary action (Brindle et al, 2014; Lawton et al, 2014). During both periods fundamental questions were raised about the respective roles and responsibilities of the state and voluntary action (e.g. Beveridge, 1948; Taylor-Gooby, 2013).
These two particular periods in time can be regarded as ‘transformational moments’, when debate intensifies and the ‘moving frontier’ (Finlayson, 1990; Beveridge, 1949) appears to make a decisive shift. They should also be seen as points within an ongoing, longstanding discussion of the mixed economy of welfare (Lewis, 1999). In general, however, accounts of these shifts tend to be rather state-centric (Finlayson, 1990), risk under-estimating the contribution of voluntary action and over-simplify the fluid and variable versions of mixed economies that exist. They rarely consider the extent to which such developments have been shaped by debates on the appropriate balance of responsibilities.
In this paper we present findings from an interdisciplinary study which examined how different sets of actors construct and circulate narratives about the role, position and responsibilities of voluntary action in social welfare. The research analysed narratives articulated within documents produced by the state (e.g. green & white papers, speeches, parliamentary debates), voluntary sector organisations (e.g. policy position statements, annual reports, board papers) and the general public (through Mass Observation directives) during both the 2010s and 1940s.
We identify two, high-level, overarching narratives, evident in both time periods about the role, position, and contributions of voluntary action. The first positions voluntary action at the heart of democratic society – it is part of who we are as a nation. The second positions voluntary organisations as key actors within the provision of welfare – it is part of what we do to meet varied needs within society. This apparent consensus and continuity, however, masks important differences and points of intense contestation. We highlight how variations in where emphasis is placed within these narratives have been used in attempts to both carve out and restrict room for voluntary action in social welfare. We also highlight how these narratives reflect fundamental differences in the nature of the relationship between voluntary action and the state: a ‘pragmatic partnership’ in the 1940s, in contrast to one of ‘antagonistic collaboration’ in the 2010s.
We conclude by reflecting on how the narratives deployed by different sets of actors can be seen as field-shaping discursive interventions indicative of struggles over moving frontiers between the state, voluntary action, and others. They can be seen as active attempts to ‘make room’ and secure, or destabilise, positions for voluntary organisations or the voluntary sector as a whole. Such interventions gain greater salience at moments of unsettlement and transformation. We offer reflections on implications for theory, policy, and practice.

Authors

• Georgina Brewis, University College London

• Angela Ellis Paine, City, University of London

• Rob Macmillan, Sheffield Hallam University

• Rose Lindsey, University of Southampton

• Irene Hardill, Northumbria University