为什么研究应关注戒毒系统市场化的影响?

Jessica Storbjörk, Kerstin Stenius
{"title":"为什么研究应关注戒毒系统市场化的影响?","authors":"Jessica Storbjörk, Kerstin Stenius","doi":"10.15288/jsads.2019.s18.31","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Researchers generally assume that addiction treatment systems can be viewed as entities and planned with the citizens' best interests in mind. We argue that another steering principle, the market logic, has permeated many Western World treatment systems but is neglected in research. We demonstrate how it may affect system-level planning, service provision, and the service users.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We draw on an ongoing Swedish study, with some Nordic references, using several data sources: (1) public statistics on treatment expenditures and purchases; (2) interviews with service users (n = 36) and their service providers (n = 23) on different market features; (3) an observation of a large public procurement process concluding framework agreements based on competitive tendering; (4) interviews with officials involved with steering of the system and procurement (n = 16); (5) a workshop on procurement in the Nordic countries (n = 11 participants); and (6) 77 interviews with professionals, managers, and elected representatives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We outline seven propositions that call for further research attention: public procurement, as regulated in the European Union, is not suitable for addiction treatment; marketization challenges democracy, equity, needs assessment, and treatment planning; marketization causes new accountability problems and idle monitoring; marketization causes fragmentation and obstructs coordination and continuity of care; marketization causes unification of services and favors big bureaucratically sophisticated providers; treatment professionals' values are downplayed when a mistrust-based market logic replaces a trust- and needs-based logic; and marketization marginalizes treatment professionals and service users by limiting discretion.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings point toward the importance of acknowledging and mitigating market principles in treatment systems to safeguard needs assessments and planning that serve the interests of the service users and the public.</p>","PeriodicalId":17103,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. Supplement","volume":" ","pages":"31-39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6377013/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why Research Should Pay Attention to Effects of Marketization of Addiction Treatment Systems.\",\"authors\":\"Jessica Storbjörk, Kerstin Stenius\",\"doi\":\"10.15288/jsads.2019.s18.31\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Researchers generally assume that addiction treatment systems can be viewed as entities and planned with the citizens' best interests in mind. We argue that another steering principle, the market logic, has permeated many Western World treatment systems but is neglected in research. We demonstrate how it may affect system-level planning, service provision, and the service users.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We draw on an ongoing Swedish study, with some Nordic references, using several data sources: (1) public statistics on treatment expenditures and purchases; (2) interviews with service users (n = 36) and their service providers (n = 23) on different market features; (3) an observation of a large public procurement process concluding framework agreements based on competitive tendering; (4) interviews with officials involved with steering of the system and procurement (n = 16); (5) a workshop on procurement in the Nordic countries (n = 11 participants); and (6) 77 interviews with professionals, managers, and elected representatives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We outline seven propositions that call for further research attention: public procurement, as regulated in the European Union, is not suitable for addiction treatment; marketization challenges democracy, equity, needs assessment, and treatment planning; marketization causes new accountability problems and idle monitoring; marketization causes fragmentation and obstructs coordination and continuity of care; marketization causes unification of services and favors big bureaucratically sophisticated providers; treatment professionals' values are downplayed when a mistrust-based market logic replaces a trust- and needs-based logic; and marketization marginalizes treatment professionals and service users by limiting discretion.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings point toward the importance of acknowledging and mitigating market principles in treatment systems to safeguard needs assessments and planning that serve the interests of the service users and the public.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17103,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. Supplement\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"31-39\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6377013/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. Supplement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15288/jsads.2019.s18.31\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. Supplement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15288/jsads.2019.s18.31","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:研究人员普遍认为,戒毒治疗系统可以被视为实体,并以公民的最大利益为出发点进行规划。我们认为,另一个指导原则--市场逻辑--已经渗透到西方世界的许多戒毒系统中,但在研究中却被忽视了。我们将展示它如何影响系统层面的规划、服务提供以及服务使用者:方法:我们借鉴了瑞典正在进行的一项研究,并参考了北欧的一些研究,使用了几种数据来源:(1) 有关治疗支出和采购的公共统计数据;(2) 就不同市场特征对服务使用者(36 人)及其服务提供者(23 人)进行的访谈;(3) 对基于竞争性招标签订框架协议的大型公共采购过程进行的观察;(4) 对参与指导系统和采购的官员(16 人)进行的访谈;(5) 北欧国家采购研讨会(11 人参加);以及 (6) 对专业人士、管理人员和民选代表进行的 77 次访谈:结果:我们概述了需要进一步研究关注的七个命题:结果:我们概述了七项命题,需要进一步的研究关注:欧盟规定的公共采购不适合戒毒治疗;市场化挑战民主、公平、需求评估和治疗规划;市场化导致新的问责问题和监督闲置;市场化导致支离破碎,阻碍护理的协调性和连续性;市场化导致服务的统一,有利于官僚化的大型供应商;当基于不信任的市场逻辑取代基于信任和需求的逻辑时,治疗专业人员的价值被淡化;市场化通过限制自由裁量权使治疗专业人员和服务使用者边缘化。结论:研究结果表明,在治疗系统中承认并减轻市场原则的重要性,以确保需求评估和规划符合服务使用者和公众的利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Why Research Should Pay Attention to Effects of Marketization of Addiction Treatment Systems.

Objective: Researchers generally assume that addiction treatment systems can be viewed as entities and planned with the citizens' best interests in mind. We argue that another steering principle, the market logic, has permeated many Western World treatment systems but is neglected in research. We demonstrate how it may affect system-level planning, service provision, and the service users.

Method: We draw on an ongoing Swedish study, with some Nordic references, using several data sources: (1) public statistics on treatment expenditures and purchases; (2) interviews with service users (n = 36) and their service providers (n = 23) on different market features; (3) an observation of a large public procurement process concluding framework agreements based on competitive tendering; (4) interviews with officials involved with steering of the system and procurement (n = 16); (5) a workshop on procurement in the Nordic countries (n = 11 participants); and (6) 77 interviews with professionals, managers, and elected representatives.

Results: We outline seven propositions that call for further research attention: public procurement, as regulated in the European Union, is not suitable for addiction treatment; marketization challenges democracy, equity, needs assessment, and treatment planning; marketization causes new accountability problems and idle monitoring; marketization causes fragmentation and obstructs coordination and continuity of care; marketization causes unification of services and favors big bureaucratically sophisticated providers; treatment professionals' values are downplayed when a mistrust-based market logic replaces a trust- and needs-based logic; and marketization marginalizes treatment professionals and service users by limiting discretion.

Conclusions: Findings point toward the importance of acknowledging and mitigating market principles in treatment systems to safeguard needs assessments and planning that serve the interests of the service users and the public.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Youth Cognitive Responses to Alcohol Promotional Messaging: A Systematic Review. Alcohol Marketing and Adolescent and Young Adult Alcohol Use Behaviors: A Systematic Review of Cross-Sectional Studies. Exposure to Digital Alcohol Marketing and Alcohol Use: A Systematic Review. A Neurobiological Model of Alcohol Marketing Effects on Underage Drinking. Psychological Processes Underlying Effects of Alcohol Marketing on Youth Drinking.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1