Vol. 15 No. 29 (2024): Continuities and Transformations in Forms of Collective Action
Passim

Making Social Work More Socially Sustainable Through Participation: Rhetoric or Innovation?

PDF
  • Luca Pavani
Luca Pavani
University of Perugia
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/smp-15506

Published 2024-07-23

Keywords

  • partecipation,
  • social sustainability,
  • social work,
  • welfare services

How to Cite

Pavani, L. (2024). Making Social Work More Socially Sustainable Through Participation: Rhetoric or Innovation?. SocietàMutamentoPolitica, 15(29), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.36253/smp-15506

Copyright (c) 2024 Luca Pavani

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

This paper aims to explore the connection between social sustainability and participatory processes in the realm of social work, through a theoretical reflection. The guiding research questions for the work are: a) How can user participation enhance the social sustainability of social work? b)What should be the dynamic of participation between institutions and users to ensure the social sustainability of social work? In an effort to address these inquiries, we will initially conduct a comprehensive analysis of the current state of social sustainability literature to underscore the significance of user participation in social work. Subsequently, our focus will shift towards examining various forms and dynamics associated with user participation at the meso level of social work practice within the domain of welfare services in Italy. Our aim is to advocate for the adoption of co-creation processes, characterised by a bottom-linked dynamic, as an innovative approach with the potential to enhance the social sustainability of social work.

PDF

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. Addams J. (1902), Democracy and Social Ethics. University of Illinois Press.
  2. Åhman H. (2013), «Social sustainability – society at the intersection of development and maintenance», in Local Environment, 18:10, 1153-1166, https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2013.788480
  3. Allegri E. (2022), «Ricerca di servizio sociale», in Campanini A. M. (eds.), Nuovo dizionario di servizio sociale, Carocci, Roma.
  4. Allegri E., Rosina B. and Sanfelici M. (2022), «Remaking Social Work by Applying an Anti-oppressive Lens». In N. T. Tan and P. Shajahan (eds.), Remaking social work for the new global era, 29-44, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08352-5_3
  5. Arnstein S. (1969), «A ladder of citizen participation», in Journal of the American Planning Association, 35(4): 216–224.
  6. Baines D. (2011), Doing Anti-Oppressive Practice, Fernwood Publishing, Halifax and Winnipeg.
  7. Belligni S. (2004), «Miss governance, I presume», in Meridiana, 50/51: 181–209.
  8. Belotti V., Mauri D. and Zullo F. (eds.) (2021), Care leavers. Giovani, partecipazione e autonomia nel leaving care italiano, Erickson, Trento.
  9. Beresford P. (2001), «Beresford, P. (2001), Service users, social policy and the future of welfare», in Critical Social Policy, 21(4): 494-512, https://doi.org/10.1177/ 026101830102100404
  10. Beresford P. and Boxall K. (2012), «Service users. Social work education and knowledge for social work practice», in Social Work Education, 31: 155-167.
  11. Becker E., Jahn T., Sties I. and Wehling P. (1999), Sustainability and the Social Sciences, Zed Books and UNESCO, New York.
  12. Bifulco L. and Centemeri L. (2007), «La partecipazione nei Piani sociali di zona: geometrie variabili di governance locale», in Stato e mercato, Rivista quadrimestrale, 2: 221-244, https://doi.org/10.1425/25231
  13. Bifulco L. and Facchini C. (2013), Partecipazione sociale e competenze, FrancoAngeli, Milano.
  14. Bifulco L. (2018), «Urban Welfare and Social Innovation in Italy», in Social Work and Society, n. 16.
  15. Boetto H. (2017), «A transformative eco-social model: Challenging modernist assumptions in social work», in British Journal of Social Work, 47(1): 48–67. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcw149
  16. Bovaird T. and Loeffler E. (2013), «We’re All in This Together: Harnessing User and Community Co-production of Public Outcomes», in C. Staite (eds.), Making Sense of the Future: Do We Need a New Model of Public Services?, INLOGOV, Birmingham.
  17. Bozalek V. and Pease B. (2022), Post-Anthropocentric Social Work, Routledge.
  18. Bramley G. and Power S. (2009), «Urban Form and Social Sustainability: The Role of Density and Housing Type», in Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 36(1): 30-48. https://doi.org/10.1068/b33129.
  19. Carr S. (2007), «Participation, power, conflict and change: Theorising dynamics of service user participation in the social care system of England and Wales», in Critical Social Policy, 27(2): 266-276, https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018306075717
  20. Connor D. M. (1988), «A new ladder of citizen participation», in National Civic Review, 3: 249-257.
  21. Cuthill M. (2010), «Strengthening the ‘social’ in sustainable development: Developing a conceptual framework for social sustainability in a rapid urban growth region in Australia», in Sustainable Development, 18(6): 362-373. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.397
  22. Della Porta D. (1996), Movimenti collettivi e sistema politico in italia: 1960-1995, Laterza, Roma-Bari.
  23. Dempsey N., Bramley G., Power S. e Brown C. (2011), «The Social Dimension of Sustainable Development: Defining Urban Social Sustainability», in Sustainable Development, 19: 289-300.
  24. Diani M. (1992), «The Concept of Social Movement», in The Sociological Review, 40(1): 1-25, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1992.tb02943.x
  25. Dominelli L. (2002), Anti Oppressive Social Work Theory and Practice, Palgrave.
  26. Eizenberg E. and Jabareen Y. (2017), «Social Sustainability: A New Conceptual Framework», in Sustainability, 9(1): 68, https://doi.org/10.3390/su9010068.
  27. European Commission (2005), The Commission’s Contribution to the Period of Reflection and Beyond: Plan-D for Democracy, Dialogue and Debate, Bruxelles.
  28. Fargion S. (2009), Il servizio sociale. Storia, temi, dibattiti, Editori Laterza.
  29. Fargion S., Mauri D. and Rosignoli A. (2021), «Formarsi insieme: Care leavers e assistenti sociali in un percorso per promuovere la partecipazione dei bambini nei contesti di tutela», in Autonomie locali e servizi sociali, 2: 283-298, https://doi.org/10.1447/101454.
  30. Fazzi L. (2021), «Coprogettare e coprogrammare: i vecchi dilemmi di una nuova stagione del welfare locale», in Impresa Sociale, 3, https://doi.org/10.7425/IS.2021.03.03.
  31. Frasier N. (2013), The Fortunes of Feminism: From State-Managed Capitalism to Neoliberal Crisis, Verso Books.
  32. Fung A. (2003), «Recipes for public spheres: Eight institutional design choices and their consequences», in The Journal of Political Philosophy, 11: 338-367.
  33. Giddens A. (1994), Runaway world. How globalisation is reshaping our lives, Profile Books, London.
  34. Gori C. (eds.) (2023), Il reddito minimo in azione, Carocci, Roma.
  35. Habermas J. (1992) Fatti e norme. Contributo a una teoria discorsiva della democrazia, Laterza, Roma-Bari.
  36. Henderson R. and Pochin M. (2001), A right result? Advocacy, justice and empowerment, Guilford Press, NY.
  37. Julkunen I. and Uggerhoj L. (2016), «Negotiating Practice Research», in Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 36(1): 6-10, https://doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2016.1119625
  38. Khan M. A. (1995), «Sustainable Development: The Key Concepts, Issues and Implications», in Sustainable Development, 3(2): 63-69, https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.3460030203
  39. Kunz J. (2006), Social Sustainability and Community Involvement in Urban Planning. University of Tampere.
  40. Loeffler E. and Bovaird T. (2021), The Palgrave Handbook of Co-Production of Public Services and Outcomes, Palgrave and Macmillan, London.
  41. Long J. (2023), «Enhancing Children’s Participation Through Direct Reporting to the Public Authorities», in The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 31(4): 841-864, https://doi.org/10.1163/15718182-31040004
  42. Mayntz R. (1999), «La teoria della governance: sfide e prospettive», in Rivista italiana di scienza politica, XXIX: 3-21.
  43. Matthies A. L., Turunen P., Albers S., Boeck T. and Närhi K. (2000), «An eco-social approach to tackling social exclusion in European cities: A new comparative research project in progress», in European Journal of Social Work, 3(1): 43-52, https://doi.org/10.1080/714052811
  44. Moini G. (2012), Teoria critica della partecipazione, FrancoAngeli, Milano.
  45. Moldan B., Janoušková S. e Hák T. (2012), «How to understand and measure environmental sustainability: indicators and targets», in Ecological Indicators, 17: 4-13, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.04.033
  46. Moulaert F., MacCallum D., Mehmood M. and Hamdouch A. (2013), The International Handbook on Social Innovation: collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research, E. Elgar Publishers, Cheltenham (UK).
  47. Moulaert F. and MacCallum D. (2019), Advanced Introduction to Social Innovation. E. Edgar Publisher, Cheltenham.
  48. Murphy K. (2012), «The social pillar of sustainable development: A literature review and framework for policy analysis», in Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 8(1): 15-29, https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2012.11908081
  49. Närhi K. (2004), The Eco-Social Approach in Social Work and the Challenges to the Expertise of Social Work, University of Jyväskylä.
  50. Paci M. (2009), Welfare locale e democrazia partecipativa, Il Mulino, Bologna.
  51. Parra C. (2013), «Social sustainability: A competing concept to social innovation?», in F. Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A. and Hamdouch A. (eds.), The International Handbook on Social Innovation, Edward Elgar.
  52. Pope J., Annandale D. and Morrison-Saunders A. (2004), «Conceptualising sustainability assessment», in Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24: 595–616, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2004.03.001
  53. Purvis B., Mao Y., and Robinson D. (2019), «Three pillars of sustainability: In search of conceptual origins», in Sustainability Science, 14(3): 681-695, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5
  54. Ramon S., Grodofsky M., Allegri E. and Rafaelic A. (2019), «Service users’ involvement in social work education: focus on social change projects», in Social Work Education, 38:1: 89-102, https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2018.1563589
  55. Ranci C. (2005), «Le sfide del welfare locale. Problemi di coesione sociale e nuovi stili di governance», in La Rivista delle Politiche Sociali, 2, 9-26.
  56. Rappaport, J. (1981), «In praise of paradox: A social policy of empowerment over prevention», In American Journal of Community Psychology, 9(1), 1–25, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00896357
  57. Richmond M. (1917), Social Diagnosis, Russell Sage Foundation.
  58. Russell C. (2021), «Getting to Authentic Co-production: An Asset-Based Community Development Perspective on Co-production», in Loeffler E. and Bovaird T. (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Co-Production of Public Services and Outcomes, Palgrave and Macmillan.
  59. Schoolman E. D., Guest J. S., Bush K. F. and Bell A. R. (2012), «How interdisciplinary is sustainability research? Analysing the structure of an emerging scientific field», in Sustainability Science 7, 67–80, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0139-z
  60. Segatori R. (2012), Sociologia dei fenomeni politici, Laterza, Roma-Bari.
  61. Sicora A. and Fargion S. (eds) (2023), Costruzioni di genitorialità su terreni incerti, Il Mulino, Bologna.
  62. Uggerhøj L. (2011), «What is Practice Research in Social Work—Definitions, Barriers and Possibilities», in Social Work and Society, 9(1).
  63. Vogt M. and Weber C. (2019), «Current challenges to the concept of sustainability», in Global Sustainability, 2, https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2019.1
  64. Voorberg W. H., Bekkers V. J. J. M. and Tummers L. G. (2015), «A Systematic Review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: Embarking on the Social Innovation Journey», in Public Management Review, 17(9): 1333–1357, https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.930505