Hipótesis y Objetivos

I decided to use a multiple case study approach. Although Flyvbjerg argues that ‘one can often generalise on the basis of a single case’ (Flyvbjerg 2006 p228), multiple case studies can provide more compelling evidence and be considered more robust (Yin 2014). Yin differentiates between cases that have been selected on the basis that they predict similar results (which he refers to as literal replication) or predict

contrastable results (which he describes as theoretical replication) (Yin2014, p57). I chose the latter approach. Both the literature on mainstreaming, and the findings of my initial exploratory interviews with equality officers suggested that the form and effectiveness of mainstreaming work is very context specific. The political make-up of the authority, the history of equality work locally, the attitude of senior managers and the strength or otherwise of equality focussed civil society groups all appeared to be significant factors affecting the form and impact of local equality work. In order to explore these factors it was important to choose case studies that represented a range of different local authority types. The depth involved in a case study approach limited the number of cases that I could investigate. For these case studies I drew on evidence from interviews with council officers working on equality, including director level staff whose wider responsibilities included equality, councillors with an interest in or particular responsibility for equality work within the council and external civil society representatives that were engaged with the council to some extent on equality issues as well as documentary evidence of equality policies and practices within each authority. I concluded that three case studies would allow me to contrast the different authorities and compare differences in context, while at the same time being manageable. Any more than three case studies would have made the process overwhelming.

68 3.5.4 Selecting the case study authorities

Local government in England is responsible for a range of services including education, highways, transport planning, passenger transport, social care, housing, libraries, leisure and recreation, environmental health, waste collection, waste disposal, planning applications, strategic planning and local taxation collection. English local government consists of five types of authority: county councils, district councils, unitary authorities, metropolitan districts and London boroughs. In some areas there are also parish councils with limited responsibilities for services such as parks and playgrounds, community centres, allotments and with the power to make small grants to local charities. Parish councils do not employ large numbers of staff, or have equality teams so are outside the scope of this study.

In some parts of England local government operates under a two tier system with county and district councils with different responsibilities. In others there is a one tier system with unitary authorities or metropolitan boroughs responsible for all local authority services. In London each borough is a unitary authority. However, the Greater London Authority (GLA) provides London-wide government and shares responsibility for certain services such as highways, transport planning and strategic planning. In parts of the country with a two tier system county councils provide the majority of services including education, highways, transport planning, passenger transport, social care, libraries, waste disposal and strategic planning for the whole county. Each county in a two tier system is divided into several districts (which may be called borough or city councils), which cover a smaller area and provide more local services such as housing, leisure and recreation, environmental health, waste collection, planning applications and local taxation collections. In two tier systems councillors may be ‘dual mandate’ holding seats on both the district and the county council. Different types of authority have different electoral timetables. All

councillors are elected for a four year term. In some areas elections for all council seats are held every four years. In others such as some district councils, a third of the council is re-elected with elections taking place most years, except for the year when the county council elections take place.

The local authorities with the longest history of equalities work in England have tended to be Labour controlled (Conley and Page 2015). These authorities have been

69

mainly urban, either unitary authorities covering a city, or London boroughs. Few county councils have had the same history. I decided therefore to select local

authorities that represented three main types of local government structure: a county council, a unitary authority and a London Borough. I wanted authorities that

reflected both urban and rural areas and councils under different political control. I decided to avoid those authorities with which I had worked in the past. Although my previous contacts with some senior managers in these authorities might have made access easier I believed that these contacts might affect the openness of other members of staff. In addition the authorities I had worked with were by their nature those with a strong commitment to equality that pre-dated the introduction of the PSED. In order to include authorities without this history I would have had to combine authorities which I already knew well with those which I did not know at all. This differing level of background knowledge might mean that I was not comparing like with like. I also made a decision not to study the local authorities where I lived or worked since I was involved in groups and networks that were involved in lobbying both authorities on equality issues and felt that officers would be understandably wary of discussing their views on their authority’s equality policy as they might believe their comments would be shared with these groups.