Public Value Means Value to the Public

Patrick Barwise

London Business School

1. What’s the problem we’re trying to address?

2. Net public value: what it is and isn’t

3. Initial evaluation of the BBC’s proposals

Oxford 19.1.06: BBC Governance and the PVT

1. What’s the Problem We’re Trying to Address?

(With a few quibbles) the BBC provides:

• Good range and quality of services, popular with the public

• Good value for money and financial probity• One of the most trusted media brands on the planet• Independent of government • Supports citizenship, education, culture, training, new

technology, etc• Backbone of UK broadcasting for 80 years – a great

British success story

So What’s the Problem?

• Not perfect, eg Hutton, dumbing down (?)• Governance requires difficult judgements about

scope, populism, etc• Governors have lacked expertise, resources,

independence from management• Lack of transparency, framework, objective evidence• Inevitably losing share (in TV)• Offends market fundamentalists (although chosen

60m times/day)• Commercial and political vested interests (usually

calling for less competition)

2. Net Public Value: What It Is and Isn’t

As defined and used in the 2004 review of the BBC’sdigital television services (1):• Public value is the overall benefit to the UK public• Includes short- and long-term, direct and indirect, consumer and citizenship benefits• Net public value is public value after allowing for both the cost of providing the service and the indirect effects of its market impact

(1) Independent Review of the BBC’s Digital Television Services, October 2004

(www.culture.gov.uk), p 19

Net Public Value is NOT

• A metric (ie an objective, quantitative measure): it is a “structured, evidence-based framework for making subjective judgements”

• A sophisticated technique, although these may be used to analyse specific issues such as consumer preferences or market impact

• A way of balancing benefits to the public against disbenefits to other market players: the market impact of a BBC service is included only to the extent to which it indirectly affects the service’s net benefit to the UK public

3. Initial Evaluation of BBC’s Proposals

• About improving something that works, not replacing something that doesn’t

• BBC’s main accountability is directly to viewers and listeners (choice)

• Grade reforms already addressing problems with Governors: Hutton, expertise, resources, independence from management

• Service licences and PVT will provide transparency, a framework, and evidence

• Easily the most sophisticated and transparent PSB governance scheme in the world; should be given time to bed in

Five Concerns

1. Won’t satisfy market fundamentalists or commercial and political vested interests

2. Public voice: general consumer organisations (Which?, NCC) not involved; VLV punches above its weight but has limited resources

3. BBC purposes and service licences are too complex: need to keep focused on what matters to the public – good programmes (“inform, educate, and entertain”)

4. Market Impact Assessment: need to follow this through to its effect on net public value

5. Scope is inherently controversial at the margin (eg local TV)

Finally – the PVT Cuts Both Ways

• From now on, the onus will also be on the BBC’s critics to say why the public would benefit from their proposals