Fantasy paradigms of health inequalities: utopian thinking?

Alex Scott-Samuel, Katherine Elizabeth Smith

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    21 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    This paper argues that, while it can be politically expedient for governments to engage with health inequalities, they cannot, within the confines of neoliberalism, realistically propose actions that evidence suggests will effectively reduce them - such as tackling power inequalities, social status and connections or class inequality. Indeed, a dominant 'policy paradigm' prioritising economic growth restricts the ability of policy actors to imagine alternative, more equitable scenarios. In this context, some policy actors and researchers have devised a parallel fantasy world in which proximal, downstream, easily-tackled exposures are posited as potential solutions to health inequalities. The consequence of this is a widespread public sector culture in which well-meaning policy-makers, practitioners, researchers and members of the public collude in sustaining a 'cargo cult' of health behaviourism. In examining this situation, we draw on accounts and critiques of utopian thinking to help explain: (i) the remarkable persistence of policy proposals to tackle health inequalities via downstream interventions, in spite of the strength of evidence challenging such approaches; and (ii) the limited extent to which more upstream proposals inform policy debates. We argue Ruth Levitas’ notion of ‘utopia as method’ offers an imaginative and potentially useful avenue for future health inequalities research.
    LanguageEnglish
    Pages418-436
    Number of pages19
    JournalSocial Theory and Health
    Volume13
    Issue number3-4
    Early online date1 Jul 2015
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 31 Aug 2015

    Fingerprint

    Fantasy
    paradigm
    Health
    health
    Utopias
    Behaviorism
    Research Personnel
    behaviorism
    Aptitude
    Economic Development
    Public Sector
    utopia
    Administrative Personnel
    neoliberalism
    ritual
    evidence
    persistence
    Thinking
    social status
    public sector

    Keywords

    • health inequalities
    • neo-liberalism
    • utopian
    • power
    • evidence-based policy
    • health behaviourism

    Cite this

    @article{e69b5fa2056a427a9b65f10bed67803b,
    title = "Fantasy paradigms of health inequalities: utopian thinking?",
    abstract = "This paper argues that, while it can be politically expedient for governments to engage with health inequalities, they cannot, within the confines of neoliberalism, realistically propose actions that evidence suggests will effectively reduce them - such as tackling power inequalities, social status and connections or class inequality. Indeed, a dominant 'policy paradigm' prioritising economic growth restricts the ability of policy actors to imagine alternative, more equitable scenarios. In this context, some policy actors and researchers have devised a parallel fantasy world in which proximal, downstream, easily-tackled exposures are posited as potential solutions to health inequalities. The consequence of this is a widespread public sector culture in which well-meaning policy-makers, practitioners, researchers and members of the public collude in sustaining a 'cargo cult' of health behaviourism. In examining this situation, we draw on accounts and critiques of utopian thinking to help explain: (i) the remarkable persistence of policy proposals to tackle health inequalities via downstream interventions, in spite of the strength of evidence challenging such approaches; and (ii) the limited extent to which more upstream proposals inform policy debates. We argue Ruth Levitas’ notion of ‘utopia as method’ offers an imaginative and potentially useful avenue for future health inequalities research.",
    keywords = "health inequalities, neo-liberalism, utopian, power, evidence-based policy, health behaviourism",
    author = "Alex Scott-Samuel and Smith, {Katherine Elizabeth}",
    year = "2015",
    month = "8",
    day = "31",
    doi = "10.1057/sth.2015.12",
    language = "English",
    volume = "13",
    pages = "418--436",
    journal = "Social Theory and Health",
    issn = "1477-8211",
    number = "3-4",

    }

    Fantasy paradigms of health inequalities : utopian thinking? / Scott-Samuel, Alex; Smith, Katherine Elizabeth.

    In: Social Theory and Health, Vol. 13, No. 3-4, 31.08.2015, p. 418-436.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Fantasy paradigms of health inequalities

    T2 - Social Theory and Health

    AU - Scott-Samuel, Alex

    AU - Smith, Katherine Elizabeth

    PY - 2015/8/31

    Y1 - 2015/8/31

    N2 - This paper argues that, while it can be politically expedient for governments to engage with health inequalities, they cannot, within the confines of neoliberalism, realistically propose actions that evidence suggests will effectively reduce them - such as tackling power inequalities, social status and connections or class inequality. Indeed, a dominant 'policy paradigm' prioritising economic growth restricts the ability of policy actors to imagine alternative, more equitable scenarios. In this context, some policy actors and researchers have devised a parallel fantasy world in which proximal, downstream, easily-tackled exposures are posited as potential solutions to health inequalities. The consequence of this is a widespread public sector culture in which well-meaning policy-makers, practitioners, researchers and members of the public collude in sustaining a 'cargo cult' of health behaviourism. In examining this situation, we draw on accounts and critiques of utopian thinking to help explain: (i) the remarkable persistence of policy proposals to tackle health inequalities via downstream interventions, in spite of the strength of evidence challenging such approaches; and (ii) the limited extent to which more upstream proposals inform policy debates. We argue Ruth Levitas’ notion of ‘utopia as method’ offers an imaginative and potentially useful avenue for future health inequalities research.

    AB - This paper argues that, while it can be politically expedient for governments to engage with health inequalities, they cannot, within the confines of neoliberalism, realistically propose actions that evidence suggests will effectively reduce them - such as tackling power inequalities, social status and connections or class inequality. Indeed, a dominant 'policy paradigm' prioritising economic growth restricts the ability of policy actors to imagine alternative, more equitable scenarios. In this context, some policy actors and researchers have devised a parallel fantasy world in which proximal, downstream, easily-tackled exposures are posited as potential solutions to health inequalities. The consequence of this is a widespread public sector culture in which well-meaning policy-makers, practitioners, researchers and members of the public collude in sustaining a 'cargo cult' of health behaviourism. In examining this situation, we draw on accounts and critiques of utopian thinking to help explain: (i) the remarkable persistence of policy proposals to tackle health inequalities via downstream interventions, in spite of the strength of evidence challenging such approaches; and (ii) the limited extent to which more upstream proposals inform policy debates. We argue Ruth Levitas’ notion of ‘utopia as method’ offers an imaginative and potentially useful avenue for future health inequalities research.

    KW - health inequalities

    KW - neo-liberalism

    KW - utopian

    KW - power

    KW - evidence-based policy

    KW - health behaviourism

    U2 - 10.1057/sth.2015.12

    DO - 10.1057/sth.2015.12

    M3 - Article

    VL - 13

    SP - 418

    EP - 436

    JO - Social Theory and Health

    JF - Social Theory and Health

    SN - 1477-8211

    IS - 3-4

    ER -