The Structural reform: a Danish public sector reform and disability policy – some consequences

Abstract

On the 1st of January, 2007, the most comprehensive and important Danish public sector reform for decades, the socalled Structural reform, was implemented. As a consequence of the reform, the number of municipalities was reduced with new municipalities thereby serving considerably larger numbers of residents. The enlarged municipalities were expected to provide more and better welfare services to the citizens for the same amount of tax money. Furthermore, the enlarged municipalities took over full responsibility for the provision, production and delivery of disability services to citizens with disabilities and other socially disadvantaged people from the counties. This has had major consequences for employees, managers and citizens in the field. The employees are mostly professionals such as social workers, nurses and teachers. The managers typically have a background as professionals in the field. Citizens with disability and socially disadvantaged people number more than 600,000 citizens (out of approximately 6 million Danes) with blindness, deafness, learning disabilities, physical disabilities, psychiatric disabilities, speech impediments, homelessness, drug addiction, prostitution and vulnerable children and youths being the major issues. The Danish welfare state, which is a universalistic welfare state, acquires necessary and profound legitimacy by taking care of this group of citizens. The Structural reform has led to a paradigmatic struggle regarding the provision of the services and the management of the public spending on the services. Before the Structural reform, the professional paradigm was the dominating one. That is, services were provided, produced and delivered to the citizens as end-users on the basis of the professionals’ norms, standards and codices. After the Structural reform, the bureaucratic paradigm was implemented to control and regulate municipalities’ spending on the services to its citizens with disability and socially disadvantaged people. Now the bureaucratic paradigm has become the dominating one. This has led to a struggle between the professional and the bureaucratic paradigms. Some of the consequences of this paradigmatic struggle for the employees as professionals, the managers and the citizens as end-users are presented, analyzed and discussed.