Public opinion and the privatization of welfare: some theoretical implications

The social policy of the Thatcher government is characterized by an abrupt shift in the direction of the private sector. To what extent does this reflect what people want? The Institute of Economic Affairs conclude from the only suitable national opinion survey that such a move is strongly supported. Our reanalysis of their data shows that this strand in public opinion can coexist with, and need not contradict, an equal public enthusiasm for state welfare. Such results have important implications for our understanding of social policy. We conclude, therefore, with a discussion of contrasting marxist and liberal accounts which seeks to show that the evidence of ambivalence in popular attitudes about the welfare state supports particular developments in theory.     

Using macro variables in program evaluation

This paper discusses the importance of using macro-level variables for program analysis. It is argued that three types of macro variables--cultural, economic, and demographic--provide a context for evaluation, and offer alternative explanations for the success or failure of a program. The problems of causality and availability of data are discussed. Macro variables are seen to be especially useful in "meta evaluation," and in integrating the results of specific program evaluations into general conclusions.     

Pragmatic decisions in the evaluation of consumer satisfaction with mental health treatment

This article examines pragmatic choices which must be made in conducting consumer satisfaction assessment of mental health treatment. It is argued that choices involving sample, format, and procedure for examining satisfaction may influence the results of such research, and must be considered when creating or evaluating these efforts. These choices are examined in detail.     

Frustrated fertility: a population paradox

This Bulletin examines the causes of subfecundity -- the diminished ability to reproduce -- and its effect today and in the past on the fertility, or actual reproductive performance, of individuals and, hence, populations. By definition, all real populations are subfecund since all experience some degree of involuntary biological factors affecting coitus, conception, or the ability to carry a conceptus to live birth which reduces their fecundity below the estimated biological population maximum of 15 children per woman. Affecting both men and women, these factors fall into 5 categories: genetic factors such as blood group incompatibilities and inherited sickle cell anemia or diabetes; psychopathology, including psychic stress and behavioral disorders (e.g., drug and alcohol abuse); infectious diseases such as gonorrhea, malaria, tuberculosis, and postabortion infection; malnutrrition, including the chronic undernutrition of the 3rd World and the overnutrition of developed societies; and hazards posed by increasing amounts of radiation and toxic chemicals in the environment. Reducing subfecundity requires improved living conditions, avoidance of or protection from known hazards, and adoption of medical advances which now can help 40 to 60% of subfecund couples. But even in the U.S. fertility would certainly rise among the 15% of couples now estimated to be involuntarily childless and the 10% who have fewer children than they want, and among disadvantaged groups, and teenagers.     

科学时代的人类学现实主义

[提要]人类学是关于现实主义的学科。文章明确区分了现实主义和科学主义（或者说客观主义）,认为现实主义应该确认包括民族志在内的所有知识得以产生的语境及其偶发性。而科学主义（一套将科学作为权威来源的说辞）却悖论式地否认科学本身得以生成的语境。一个现实主义的视角不但以社会经验为依据,并且也意识到以此获得知识的种种局限性。如今我们生活的世界充斥着市场消费主义、新自由主义、审计文化以及各种强权暴政,这些势力出于其自身政治利益的需要,正想方设法取代各种质性的修辞研究,从而遏制批判性的思想。有鉴于此,现实主义不啻为一个探索人类学理论所蕴含的政治意义的较为恰当的视角。