This article reviews the effectiveness of the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED), based on insights from debates within equality law and theories of regulation. Drawing on examples of its practical implementation, the strengths and weaknesses of the ‘reflexive turn’ in equality law are assessed. Whilst recognising the concerns raised regarding second-generation regulation, such as its inability to address structural power relations, the article proposes that this form of regulation has some merit when applied to equality law. First, the participatory processes that it produces can in themselves be viewed as equality outcomes, particularly when equality is understood to encompass the participation and inclusion of vulnerable groups. Second, this form of regulation can introduce change within organisations, proving reasonably resilient once embedded in standards of good management practice. The paper does not suggest that the processes of the PSED cannot be improved, and instead proposes a number of ways in which second-generation regulation can be made more effective. However, it argues that examples of the implementation of the PSED show how reflexive regulation can provide more effective and resilient means to support the realisation of equality and social justice than at first appears.

中文翻译：

---

公共部门平等义务：通过第二代监管实施平等权利

本文根据平等法和监管理论中的辩论的见解，回顾了公共部门平等义务 (PSED) 的有效性。借鉴其实际实施的例子，评估了平等法中“反思转向”的优势和劣势。虽然认识到对第二代监管提出的担忧，例如其无法解决结构性权力关系，但本文提出这种监管形式在应用于平等法时具有一些优点。首先，它产生的参与过程本身可以被视为平等的结果，特别是当平等被理解为包括弱势群体的参与和包容时。其次，这种形式的监管可以在组织内部引入变革，一旦嵌入良好管理实践的标准，证明具有合理的弹性。该论文并未暗示不能改进 PSED 的流程，而是提出了一些可以使第二代监管更有效的方法。然而，它认为 PSED 实施的例子表明，反身性监管如何能够提供比最初出现的更有效和更有弹性的手段来支持平等和社会正义的实现。