Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
The Not-for-profit sector and Public Health

The Not-for-profit sector and Public Health

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,597|Likes:
Published by Tim Antric
In this paper, I ntroduce my understanding of NFPO’s in New Zealand, setting clear limits to the area of the sector I will consider. I then consider how the Not for Profit sector has developed in this area over the last two decades before presenting my own thoughts around the
current situation for this part of the sector.
In this paper, I ntroduce my understanding of NFPO’s in New Zealand, setting clear limits to the area of the sector I will consider. I then consider how the Not for Profit sector has developed in this area over the last two decades before presenting my own thoughts around the
current situation for this part of the sector.

More info:

Published by: Tim Antric on Jul 05, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less

05/25/2012

pdf

text

original

 
N
OT FOR
P
ROFIT
O
RGANISATIONS
T
IM
A
NTRIC
 F
RIDAY
, 09 J
UNE
2006 P
AGE
1
OF
10
Introduction
Public health is most commonly defined “in terms of its aims - to reduce disease andmaintain health of the whole population” (Beaglehole & Bonita 1997). It is a broaddiscipline which has at its core the promotion of wellness and the prevention of disease.In Aotearoa New Zealand, the mix of international and indigenous approaches to healthhave led to the development of a holistic approach to the promotion of health supportedby a range of Government and Not for Profit (NFP) agencies. I use public health in thispaper as an all-embracing term, cutting across “housing, income, deprivation, localsafety and security, transport, communication, children, transitions, old people, training,employment and refugees” (Larner & Craig 2002).My experience of work within this sector, in forming partnerships between Governmentagencies, NFP organisations (NFPO’s) and communities, and in developing newprojects to address social, health and environmental matters has enhanced myunderstanding of issues affecting life in Aotearoa New Zealand. In this paper, I seek tointroduce my understanding of NFPO’s in this country, setting clear limits to the area of the sector I will consider. I will then consider how the Not for Profit sector has developedin this area over the last two decades before presenting my own thoughts around thecurrent situation for this part of the sector.
What is a Not for Profit Organisation?
Wikipedia (2006a) defines a NFPO as “an organization whose primary objective is tosupport some issue or matter of private interest or public concern for non-commercialpurposes”. This definition fails to acknowledge the huge diversity of NFPO’s, rangingfrom hugely commercial operations such as Saudi Aramco, the largest oil corporation inthe world, through to the local chess club. The Free Encyclopedia’s definition of NFPO’sembraces the vast majority of organisations but effectively excludes state ownedcommercial operations, including Genesis Energy, Landcorp and New Zealand Post. Ishall focus on NFPO’s that provide avenues for the advancement of public health andwithin that those that see themselves as advocates and service providers. In doing so Ido not seek to detract from the contribution to wellness, social capital and communitycohesiveness contributed by sporting clubs, women’s groups and others, nor from thetremendous contribution Housing New Zealand Corporation, Accident CompensationCorporation and other NFP Corporations make to this country, but rather to acknowledgemy own limitations in seeking to understand the entirety of this massive sector.Statistics New Zealand uses a United Nations (UN) definition of NFPO. Thesegovernment officials define the NFP sector as consisting of agencies that
are organised to the extent that they can be separately identified
are not for profit and do not distribute any surplus they may generate to thosewho own or control them
are institutionally separate from government
are in control of their own destiny, and
are non-compulsory in both terms of membership and member’s input(Statistics NZ 2005)
 
N
OT FOR
P
ROFIT
O
RGANISATIONS
T
IM
A
NTRIC
 F
RIDAY
, 09 J
UNE
2006 P
AGE
2
OF
10
The UN is an international organisation established in 1945. This organisation draws itsrepresentation from fifty member states and has within its aims to promote human rights,sustainable economic development and social development across the globe. NewZealand has shown its commitment to the ideals of the UN through being a signatory tothe United Nations Charter and through the ratification of various documents, includingthe United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and through enshrining humanrights in law (www.hrc.co.nz). This current Government’s commitment to the ideals of the UN has allowed the space for development of many NFPO’s as it is their corebusiness to promote and work for the rights of the disadvantaged. Although it should benoted that prior to World War II, Aotearoa New Zealand had a strong non-Governmentsector with politicial clout (Piddington 2005) which is only now recovering. If, as theHuman Rights Commission articulates, “everyone has a responsibility to act to endviolence” and all New Zealanders have a right to health then there is much scope for NFPO’s to work with Government to achieve human rights for all. This is of particular importance when one considers our founding document, Te Tiriti O Waitangi, whichguarantees the same rights for M
ā
ori as for Tauiwi and yet it is the tangata whenua whoare most affected by violence and have the poorest health expectations.The UN definition of NFPO’s narrows down the organisations that might be deemed toconstitute what in Aotearoa New Zealand is now frequently called the NFP or Thirdsector. Through identifying NFPO’s as “non-compulsory”, however, attention is deflectedfrom the organisations created by statute which we are required to contribute throughtaxation, levies, and so forth. Within this country, these institutions include DistrictHealth Boards and the Accident Compensation Corporation, whilst having a contributionto Public Health, these organisations sit outside the scope of this paper.Being “in control of their own destiny” is a defining criteria that few of the agencies of interest to me would feel able meet! Yes, they have Management Committees or Boards but their increasing reliance on Government contracts has effectively limited their ability to set their own agenda and direction.I shall use the term NFPO to refer exclusively to those organisation that fulfil theWikipedia definition but also have a focus on service provision which supports thedevelopment and wellness of individuals and communities. These organisations willhave non-commercial purposes as their primary concern, that is to say their primaryconcern is the arts, education, welfare, research or some other philanthropic goal. I shallfocus on those organisations that fit the Inland Revenue Department’s definition of “non-profit organisations”, that is to say “any society, association or organisation that is notcarried on for the profit or gain of any member and has rules that do not allow money,property or any other benefits to be distributed to any of its members” whilst also havinga focus on public health in its widest sense.
The place of Not for Profit Organisations in Aotearoa New Zealand
The formal NFP sector in Aotearoa New Zealand has its roots in the churches andcommunities of this nation although recognition must also be given to the M
ā
oriinstitutions of wh
ā
nau and hap
ū
that have supported communities in this country for athousand years. It is only relatively recently that these institutions have been formalisedby the state and perhaps as a means of controlling M
ā
ori in the wider project of colonisation. The Maori Trust Board Act for instance was an attempt by the Crown toreduce its interactions with hap
ū
, despite it being the hapu leaders who were signatoriesto our founding document, Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
 
N
OT FOR
P
ROFIT
O
RGANISATIONS
T
IM
A
NTRIC
 F
RIDAY
, 09 J
UNE
2006 P
AGE
3
OF
10
The history of social change in NZ and the configuration of Public and non-Governmentorganisations in that change are well documented by the Royal Commission on SocialPolicy (1987). Public sector provisions before the reforms of the 1980s were based onan assumption of “a bounded national economy, government by official agencies . . . asingle notion of society and the male breadwinner” as citizen (Larner & Craig 2002). Itwas a period when, argue Larner and Craig (2002), the public sector had significantlyreduced the “role and influence of non-governmental agencies” in both developing policyand providing services. The welfare system assumed social security ‘from the cradle tothe grave’, starting with the old age pension introduced in 1898, the subsequent socialsecurity legislation in 1938 and finishing with the introduction of the Domestic PurposesBenefit in 1973 (Knutson 1998). Because Women, M
ā
ori, non-European immigrantsand other non white male able bodied people were systemically excluded from formalposts in the government sector, this approach effectively excluded these groups fromengagement within both the state sector and much of the formalised NFP sector.However, strong discourses could be seen in the M
ā
ori, women’s and communitydevelopment movements. These groups effectively worked in the community,developing strong and vibrant networks of services through the likes of Rural WomenNew Zealand, Maori Women’s Welfare League, Kingitanga movement, and others.The NFP sector as it can be seen today has been shaped by policy and practice over the last twenty years. Beginning with the election of the fourth Labour Government in1984 the changes began which shaped the sector into its current form. The emergenceof neo-liberalism within Aotearoa New Zealand (and elsewhere) saw a reformation of social policies primarily based around the notion of paid work as the main means of ensuring the welfare of individuals (Boston, Dalziel & St John 1999). Kelsey (1995) notesthat up until the 1980’s, civil society in Aotearoa New Zealand was organised aroundsingle issues, most of which were social whilst the reforms introduced by the fourthLabour Government organised society around economic reforms.The economic reforms introduced at this time were, and still are, the most major structural changes Aotearoa New Zealand has seen and the pace with which thosechanges happened left many in the NFP sector reeling with “major cuts in governmentfunding… growing demands on dwindling resources… [and] a bureaucratic nightmare for community organisations” (Kelsey 1995). One of the core principles of the reforms wasthat “consensus amongst interest groups on quality decisions rarely if ever arises beforethey are . . . implemented . . . it develops after they are taken, as the decisions deliver satisfactory results” (Douglas 1993). Little if any account of the experience andknowledge of the sector was involved in developing the reforms. It must also be notedthat whilst the changes were made with little consultation with the NFP sector, it wasalso at this time that the need for NFPO’s was at its greatest, The Economist (cited inKelsey 1995), makes the observation that income inequalities increased as a result of the economic reforms and Kelsey (1995) herself notes that the “traditionally marginalisedhad been joined by growing numbers of newly poor”. With the increasing role of Treasury and Finance departments under the reforms, an increasing focus on audit andoutput measurement and a move to greater significance of contracting, the changes inthe NFP sector had begun. As Government reduced the ability of many citizens toeffectively participate in society, it also funded research such as the Royal Commissionon Social Policy (1987) that identified how the very supports it was removing contributedto a fair society (Kelsey 1995); at least they knew what effect they were having on the“ordinary New Zealander”.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->