This study applied the case study methodology. According to Creswell, case study research is a qualitative approach in which the investigator explores a bounded system (a case) or multiple bounded systems (cases) over time, through detailed, in-depth data collection involving multiple sources of information and reports a case description through case-based themes.84 Three criteria informed the choice of the case study research methodology. First, this study sought to understand law in its emergence and operations and was therefore inclined to adopt the case study approach which emphasizes the crucial role of pattern and context in achieving knowledge. Though the Public Sector Equality Duty is a national legislation that applies to almost all public bodies in Britain, its implementation could be readily understood from a specific institutional context, in this instance the London Borough of Southwark. Furthermore, the bureaucratic implementation of laws involves local decision-making and governance, both of which could be very contentious as they require the exercise of discretionary powers. The implementation of the duty is particularly vulnerable not only to changes in key personnel but also to changes in political control within the local authority. In other words, the operational boundaries and
80 CRPD Article 24(2) (c) and Article 24(5).
81 CRPD Article 27(1) (i).
82 CRPD Article 14(2).
83 A. Lawson, supra no.68. pp 30-31.
84 J Creswell, Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: choosing among five approaches (London, Sage Publications 2007). See also, RK Yin, Case Study Research: design and methods (London, Sage Publications 2009).
46
limits of the equality duty may be set by the political and organisational context of the local authority. The dynamism of the voluntary and community organizations, the partnership arrangements of the authority and its organisational culture in general are all key elements of this crucial local political and organisational context. Quite simply, it is the context that dominates and shapes the nature of local implementation of the equality duty.
Second, it was important that the method should be able to answer the research questions which the study sought to answer. The case study research sets out to answer the ‘how’ and
‘why’ questions which deal with operational links and are predominantly posed in this study.
The positive duty to promote equality is a new innovation to the conventional anti-discrimination laws and there is a lack of evidence on their implementation by public bodies, especially local authorities. Therefore case study approach emerges as the most relevant characteristics of the social process being studied but also the fluidity of the phenomenon of discrimination which provide its theoretical framework. The implementation of the equality duty requires a joint-up, cut-crossing approach to dealing with inequality which cross organizational or institutional boundaries. Furthermore, the legislation on the positive duty to promote equality adopts a reflexive approach, encouraging the participation of persons with disabilities and other stakeholders in the decision making process of the organization. This would suggest that the relationship between the local authorities’ decision-making and its processes for implementing the duty are fundamentally interactive due to the legal framework in which they operate. It was therefore necessary not only to gain detailed knowledge of the policies, practices, process and systems of the London Borough of Southwark and the diverse views of the key actors involved with the formulation and implementation of the Council’s equality and diversity agenda but also to analyse the views of the other social actors outside the organization such as organizations representing persons with a disability.
With regard to the issue of ‘representativeness’ or ‘replication strategies’ as an essential dimension of case study analysis, it is frequently asserted that case study research is limited in terms of the claims that it can make on ‘knowledge’. Critics note that, in focusing on single situations or institutions chosen purposively rather than by random sampling, this particularistic approach may not produce comparable results or engage with relevant
85 J Creswell, ibid.
47
generalities. However, certain approaches can be employed to militate against the case study becoming merely episodic. One adopted here has been to focus on the theoretical implications of the work whereby the case investigated is not framed as representative in the sense that the results can be generalised to other local authorities or public bodies, but to the extent that the case is a ‘theoretical exemplary of the key conceptual and legal concerns addressed in the study.86 Silverman87 contends that a case is intrinsic not only because of its particularity and ordinariness but because the researcher does not intend to build theories out of generalization.
This study is not intended to deliver conclusive change. Rather, its aim is to broaden understanding of the equality duty by exploring, describing and explaining the conceptual legal issues arising from its implementation which could serve decision-makers as a potential blueprint for change.
2.2 The Case: London Borough of Southwark
The London Borough Southwark (Southwark Council) is a local authority in England to which the Public Sector Equality Duty applies by virtue of Schedule 19 of the Equality Act 2010. The borough borders the city of London and the London borough of tower hamlets to the north (the river Thames forming the boundary), the London Borough of Lambeth to the west and the London Borough of Lewisham to the east. To the south are the London Borough of Bromley and the London Borough of Croydon. The Council employs approximately 7,600 staff, 4 Percent of which are persons with a disability and most of who work in the Tooley Street Building which is the Council’s main office. (Appendix 1, Southwark Council Staff Monitoring Report 2010).
The Council’s governance structure comprises of elected councillors and a Chief Executive.
The elected councillors are organised in to a cabinet comprising a leader and nine other members. Their work is split in to portfolios, reflecting broadly the administrative set-up of the Council. This arrangement ensures a close working relationship and on-going dialogue between the cabinet and the directorates management to ensure a shared understanding and a responsive decision making process. Executive decision can be taken by a cabinet member but key decisions affecting the Council’s overall policies must be taken by the full cabinet and sanctioned by the full council. The Council is also subject to a further level of scrutiny by Scrutiny Committees which may consider whether a decision is appropriate and recommend
86 RK Yin Supra no. 84.
87 D Silverman, Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook 2nd edition (London, Sage Publications 2005) p127.
48
that it be reconsidered. The administrative set-up of the Council consists of directorates and departments. The Council currently has eight directorates, each of which enjoys considerable freedom in managing its services. The directorates are made up of departments headed by departmental managers.
The choice of the London Borough of Southwark as the Case in this study was informed largely by the particular changes that had taken place within the Council in the equality context. Following a series of criticisms of the Council by the Local Government Ombudsman, the District Auditor, and the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee,88 Southwark council decided in 2004 to commission an independent review of its Equality and Diversity Framework. The review was aimed, amongst others to provide suggestions or recommendations which would assist the council in combating unlawful discrimination in its employment policies and service delivery. The review was headed by Lord Ouseley and made important recommendations which if implemented, would provide a framework and momentum for the council’s delivery on equality and non-discrimination. In other words, though the report was basically a policy document, it however provided a rich backdrop of ideas on the council’s management of equality and confirmed the fact that the council had the necessary political will to drive through the changes that are required by the statutory duty to promote equality.
2.3 Ethical
Considerations
Discussions on qualitative research design must address the importance of ethical considerations.89 The researcher has an obligation to respect the rights, needs, values, and desires of the informant(s). To an extent, qualitative research is always intrusive. Participant observation invades the life of the informants90 and sensitive information is frequently revealed. This was of particular concern in this study where the informants’ positions and institution are highly visible. However, the following safeguards were employed to protect the informants’ rights and to ensure that the research is conducted in an ethical manner: A research Ethics form was completed and filed with the University’s Research Ethics Committee and a letter requesting permission to proceed with the research was obtained from the research office and submitted to the head of the Equality and Diversity unit of the London Borough of Southwark.
At the start of the field work, the researcher submitted a written application to the head of the equality and diversity unit of the London Borough of Southwark and received by phone from the manager Permission to proceed with the study as articulated. In addition, special
88 Southwark council, ‘An Independent Review on the Equality and Diversity Framework of Southwark council’ (Lord H Ouseley Report) 2005, pg3 available at www.southwark.gov.uk
89 W.L. Neuman and L.W. Kreuger, Social Work Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Applications (Pearson Educational, Boston2003) p.497.
90 D. Silverman,supra no 87.
49
permission was obtained from coordinator of the council’s Equality and Diversity Panel to attend and observe the meetings of the panel. Also, at the start of each interview session, the research objectives were articulated verbally and in writing so that they were clearly understood by the relevant informants, including a description of how the data will be used.
The final decision regarding informants’ anonymity rested with the informants themselves.
The informants’ wishes to remain anonymous were adhered to when choices were made regarding reporting the data.