Territorial Politics and Health Policy: Uk Health Policy in Comparative Perspective

Description

This study is the first large-scale comparison of policy and divergence in the UK since devolution. Based on extensive original research, it argues that we see substantial divergence in policies and social citizenship among the four parts of the UK as its autonomous political systems try to solve the unpredictable and difficult puzzles of health policy-making. -- .

Scott L. Greer is lecturer in Public Policy at University College London and an affiliate of the Constitution Unit

'This pioneering analysis of the impact of devolution on the organisation of health care in the United Kingdom marks a double achievement. It illuminates both the politics of devolution and the politics of health care, as well as the relationship between the two. As such it should not only be of great interest to those concerned about the evolution of the NHS - and the potential for diversity within a common framework - but also makes a stimulating contribution to the wider, comparative health care literature.' Rudolf Klein, Emeritus Professor of Social Policy, Bath University 'In the face of simplistic notions about globalization, technological imperatives and interdependence, Prof. Scott Greer's new book offers a strong dose of political realism. How, in only a few years, could Britain's vaunted National Health Service --the presumed embodiment of social citizenship--diverge into four distinctive "national" health services? This book's thorough, politically astute research shows how local systems of party politics and policy advocacy are yielding quite different strategies for health policy in the United Kingdom. More than that, Greer's work offers a careful way of thinking about mature welfare states in the early 21st century. He invites us to appreciate how global policy debates arrive at local conclusions.' Hugh Heclo, Robinson Professor of Public Affairs, George Mason University 'In the face of simplistic notions about globalization, technological imperatives and interdependence, Prof. Scott Greer's new book offers a strong dose of political realism. How, in only a few years, could Britain's vaunted National Health Service --the presumed embodiment of social citizenship--diverge into four distinctive "national" health services? This book's thorough, politically astute research shows how local systems of party politics and policy advocacy are yielding quite different strategies for health policy in the United Kingdom. More than that, Greer's work offers a careful way of thinking about mature welfare states in the early 21st century. He invites us to appreciate how global policy debates arrive at local conclusions.'