Docstoc

Discourse element

Document Sample
Discourse element Powered By Docstoc
					DISCOURSE AND CONSENSUS OF
INSTITUTIONAL PLAYERS IN SOCIAL
HOUSING
by
     Associate Professor Mary Kaidonis
     Head of School of Accounting & Finance
     Research of accounting in its organisational, political and
     social contexts
     University of Wollongong
     Faculty of Commerce:
     inspiring social innovation




                                                                   1
The Australasian Housing Institute
(AHI)


 “a new institutional player” (Milligan,
  2004: 3).
 “help to build support for stronger
  and more relevant national and state
  housing policies” (Milligan, 2004: 3).



                                        2
 “promote debate and advocate on
  social housing”
 “engage and encourage all levels of
  government to value, seek and act on
  the advice of the AHI” (Australasian
  Housing Institute, 2005).



                                     3
Suggests
 social acceptance of the AHI reflected
  at the government level.

 Social acceptance enables the claim
  of legitimation by an institution –
  hence use of Theory of Legitimation



                                        4
Theory of legitimation
 the discourse and institutional
  elements
   crucial components of the legitimation
    process
   interplay
   mutually reinforcing




                                             5
 Mutual reinforcing

   impression of authority of a consensual
    process
   could mask conflicts of interest




                                              6
Institutional element
 broad level reflected by :
 organisations or entities of the State
 related legislative instruments
   eg acts and agreements




                                           7
 afforded authority
 exercise power within the systems
  which its society created




                                      8
Discourse
 specific vocabulary which is
  understood and shared between
  institutional players
 implicit ideology – not readily
  challenged




                                    9
LEVEL
        Institutional Element
        Institution                            Instrument of institution


1       Commonwealth Minister for Family and   Housing Assistance (Form of
        Community Services                     Agreement) Determination 2003
                                               Housing Assistance Act 1996
        State ministers of housing             Commonwealth-State Housing
                                               Agreement
                                               Bilateral Agreements


2       Departments of Housing                 Annual reports
        State statutory authorities

        State community housing associations




                                                                               10
LEVE
L
       Institutional
       Element
                                                               Discourse element
       Institution               Instrument of institution


1      Commonwealth
       Minister for Family and
                                 Housing Assistance (Form of
                                 Agreement) Determination
                                                               Sustainability
       Community Services        2003                          Financial outcomes
       State ministers of        Housing Assistance Act
       housing                   1996                          Efficiency and effectiveness
                                 Commonwealth-State
                                 Housing Agreement
                                                               Performance outcomes
                                 Bilateral Agreements

2      Departments of
       Housing
                                 Annual reports                Financial sustainability
       State statutory                                         Performance outcomes
       authorities
       State community
       housing associations




                                                                                              11
Suggests
 Dominant discourse
   Financial imperatives
     marginalise social policies




                                    12
If so, then
 UK impact of New Public Management
  “new business or commercial ethos”
  (Walker, 2000, p 281).




                                   13
Potential
 Financial discourse privileged over
  social policy discourse?
 Social policy expressed in financial
  discourse?
 Coexistence of social and financial
  discourses?



                                         14
Impact on emerging institutional
players?
 Adopt the discourse to gain
  legitimacy?
 Risk marginalisation?




                                   15
LEV
EL    Institutional                                  Discourse
      Element                                        element




3     Australasian    Constitution                   ?
      Housing         Code of conduct
      Institute       relationship of organisation
                      to housing sector including
                      policy development.


                                                             16
 Level 1 & 2 – institutions of the state
 Level 3 AHI
   to be an institutional player
     choice of discourse ?
     too early?
     potential for debate, advocacy,
      engagement of AHI ?




                                        17
18

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:3
posted:11/6/2012
language:Unknown
pages:18