Contemporary public management theory – result of NPM reforms – is considered inappropriate when it comes to public services delivery (Osborne, 2009). The literature on public service has put the emphasis on efficiency to the detriment of other values (Radnor & Johnston, 2012). While new theories have developed in the era of the New Public Governance (Osborne, 2010) – such as the public service dominant approach (Osborne, Radnor and Nasi, 2012), recasting the citizen as the co-producer of public services (Alford, 2009), and the public value model (Moore, 2002; Alford & Hughes 2008), these do not pay explicit attention to the equality of public service delivery. Our presupposition is that such novel models do not di per sè guarantee equality (see for instance, Cepiku & Giordano (2013) showing how co-production might worsen the inequality gap.
We define equality as the principle according to which “people […] in like circumstances are provided with the same facilities” (Weale, 1985). Several types exist such as equality under law, equality of outcome and equality of opportunity (Bryson & Crosby, 2015).
The by now famous research by Thomas Piketty (2003) shows that inequality in general is rising and that without government action this trend is likely to continue. This should be even truer for public services, historically the main mechanism to reduce inequality. Thus, public service organisations should enact and evaluate the achievement of value against the degree of equality. While economics, public administration and other disciplines have shown interest on the topic, the same could not be said for public management studies.
We explore the public management literature (from 1970 to 2017), with the aim of highlighting the definitions and types of public service equality, the research methods employed and the antecedents and outcomes of inequality.
We make use of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (Moher et al. 2009) and follow these eligibility criteria: (i) peer-reviewed articles published in English; (ii) public management field of studies; (iii) articles having equity or equality in the title and public in the abstract. Finally, we contact experts in the field of public service inequality and ask them to check the list of eligible publications, and to indicate possible gaps.
Early results suggest that the public management literature has been paying much attention to employment inequality (sexual, gender, religion discrimination), while neglecting user and citizen inequality. The lowest peak of attention in public management studies is in the 1990s. The equality - efficiency trade-off seems to be still crucial nowadays, after having been defined “our biggest socioeconomic trade-off by Okun in 1975. Numerous authors attempt to measure equality as the degree of impartiality in the allocation of public services. It is worthy of note that public management research on the topic is mainly hosted by journals dedicated to other disciplines (especially public administration).
Future research on the topic ought to start from an operationalization of the concept that could be used in empirical research.
Value co-creation, co-design and co-production in public services
Cepiku_Mastrodascio_IRSPM_2018.pdf 