Hem / Att delta i NSU / Förslag till nya studiekretsar / 2007 / F. From welfare systems to welfare societies

From welfare systems to welfare societies

Changing perspectives of Nordic Welfare Model(s) in times of globalization

The aim of the circle on Nordic welfare model(s) in times of globalization is to study the changes in the welfare systems. Different studies show a paradigm shift going from hierarchical, bureaucratic systems towards New Public Management/governance. This change has an influence on the way people, of different ages, are citizens. By means of comparison we want to link a theoretical understanding to empirical data. Much of the work in this circle builds on field studies, investigating, for example, perspectives on social work, and ways of learning in schools, and ways of consulting clients in social welfare institutions. We will discuss our findings in relation to different theoretical perspectives about the individual, the role of institutions, and relations between the individual and society.

A critical evaluation of central aspects of globalization and its consequences for social institutions and the individual can contribute to a better understanding of theories and practices in the welfare state. Investigating practices in social work and its consequences for the citizen can contribute to necessary developments in order to initiate win-win solutions. Analysing, understanding and comparing practices are often chosen as the starting points for applying theoretical perspectives and developing notions of understanding. Even the diversity of welfare organisations and social practices calls for such work, which can support the development of a European practice of social professions (Hare, 2003; Otto & Lorenz, 1999).
Levels of comparisons, which seem reasonable in the context of the Nordic Summer University, are international or inter- and transcultural comparisons within the Nordic countries (incl. the Baltic states) but even across their borders. While a comparison between societies focuses on clearly separated areas and population groups, a comparison between cultures builds on culturally defined contexts (Immerfall, 1991). These are, however, only the most obvious units on a macro level. And recent studies make clear that intercultural differences should not be over-interpreted but discussed in combination with transcultural similarities (Mae & Saal, 2007).

Welfare systems are undergoing a constant change. Political and social sciences describe and analyse different welfare regimes; and welfare studies have for a long time integrated international comparative perspectives describing different welfare regimes on a macro level (e.g., Esping-Andersen, 1990, 1999). These different welfare regimes answer to social/societal challenges differently; and globalization brings along different consequences for the individual, depending on institutional and political conditions of the respective welfare state (Aspalter, 2004). In the Nordic Models a change from hierarchical, bureaucratic systems to a paradigm of New Public Management/governance can be observed, which can be quite different in their various forms. However, dilemmas of the individual, which are often reflected in social work practices, are over the decades mostly addressed on a local and individual level (Lipsky, 1980). Well documented and reliable studies on the actual practice within the systems are needed in order to critically review the respective welfare system from within.

On this level international comparisons are very rare. They are, however, needed in order to reconsider sets of organising welfare practices and develop new theoretical views on the Nordic model – or, to be exact: Nordic models. On the basis of work within earlier NSU krets we urgently request more comparative research within social work and welfare studies. (1)

En viktig ambition med studier av välfärd är komparationer och olika former av jämförelser också mellan olika välfärdssystem eller system i utveckling. Traditionellt har det handlat om jämförelser av levnadsnivån inom olika grupper av befolkningen t.ex. via geografiska skillnader, socialgruppsbaserade skillnader, ålders- eller könsrelaterade skillnader. De gäller att hålla fast vid denna möjlighet till jämförelser, men se välfärden via nya ingångar för komparation. […] Ett ökat antal internationellt komparativa studier kan lyfta fram kulturella aspekter i välfärdssystemen och ge kunskap om dessa som daglig praktik (Cedersund & Brunnberg, 2007: 15-16).

A wide range of challenges is rooted not only in the labour market but also in changing demographics and family pattern and so-called old and new social problems (Kvist, 2002).

New dimensions in comparative welfare research

In the following we will take up relevant dimensions of comparison within our field and question how and why comparisons within social work research can help us find solutions to practical questions in welfare studies and contribute to theory building in social science research.

The most central dimensions to be named are nation, class, ethnicity, gender and generation. Many international comparative studies, which focus on specific population groups within different countries, have the nation as a central unit of comparison. Class is the most commonly used term for a wide variety of social and economical differences within respective societies. It is still relevant in social research even if inter-group differences are getting much more complex under the process of globalization. New perspectives on ethnicity have developed under the influence of multi-cultural societies. Obviously, sex or gender cannot be ignored as a central dimension of difference. Nordic countries are often mentioned as an example of high gender equality. However, the fact that men and women still live in somewhat separated realities and experience even similar situations differently has been shown in many studies with a gender perspective. Generation is a further factor that often directly is connected to objective living situations and subjective interpretations as children and adults experience social realities differently.

All these aspects are interrelated with dimensions of influence and hierarchies. Discussions around intersectionality made clear that there is not only one relevant dimension for describing asymmetric power relations.2 Nira Yuval-Davis (2005) points out that these social differences with their influence on subjective and political constructions of identity are closely interwoven. The question should not be which of these factors is stronger but we need to understand how different dimensions interact and influence social power relations, present in the form of multiple discrimination. These understandings have not yet been included sufficiently in research areas in welfare studies and social work.

The important lesson to be learned from ideas around intersectionality is that it is not enough to study just one dimension of difference but we need to understand how various dimensions interact in the reproduction of inequality.

In the krets dimensions of comparison will be developed in creative sets. One example could be to compare the situation and thinking of disabled and non-disabled children in a specific social context. Another example could be to focus on the situation of students from different socioeconomic strata in the educational system. Even if equality is claimed we know from various studies that it is far from realised. Not just quantitative but qualitative comparative welfare studies are important to develop in order to deepen the understanding of the complexity in the welfare system. There is a need to unmask hidden structures within the system.

Planned activities for the krets
The krets will

• create conditions conducive to a creative contact between researchers and students in different countries. Professionals are also invited to take part in the krets.
• arrange meetings to discuss ideas and/or the work with research in different stages. This can be made as workshops, seminars or presentations.
• invite guests or visit another research group to discuss new ideas in comparative research
• publish the work in the krets in articles, reports or a book.

The members of the krets

The krets will be a continuation of the programme UNMASKING THE SYSTEMS OF THE WELFARE STATE. The currently existing network with Nordic researchers from several countries will become even more established. In the network about 25 researchers are participating. They come from different countries and different institutions. Furthermore, the work in the circle is interdisciplinary with members representing social and behavioural sciences, like sociology, education, social work, disability studies and political science. New members – students, researchers and professionals working in related fields are welcome to take part in the seminars.

Wiks slott 2007 07 22

Elinor Brunnberg Gunnel Östlund
Rasmus Alenkilde Susanne Kreitz-Sandberg
Björn Hamre Helen Korsgaard
Inge Schiermacher Louise Li Langergaard
Agneta Tinnfält Marie Gustavsson Holmström
Hans-Petter Dahl-Hansen Beata Malmgren

References
Aspalter, C. (2004). Worldwide Welfare Regimes and Globalisation in N-T. Tan & A. Rowlands Social Work Around The World III. Switzerland, Berne: International Federation of Social Workers, IFSW Press.
Brunnberg, E. och Cedersund, E. (Eds.) (2007) VÄLFÄRDSPOLITIK I PRAKTIKEN. Om perspektiv och metoder i forskning. Aarhus: NSU press, Aarhus University Press.
Cedersund, E. & Brunnberg, E. (2007) Att studera välfärd på nytt sätt. In: E. Brunnberg och E. Cedersund (Eds.) VÄLFÄRDSPOLITIK I PRAKTIKEN. Om perspektiv och metoder i forskning. Aarhus: NSU press, Aarhus University Press.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990) The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1999) Social foundations of post-industrial economies. Oxford: University Press.
Hare, I. (2003) Defining social work for the 21st century. The International Federation of Social Workers´ revised definition of social work. In: International Social Work 47 (3): 407-424.
Immerfall, S. (1991) Der Vergleich als Methode der empirischen Sozialforschung. Anmerkungen zu Status und Strategie vergleichender Vorgehensweisen [Comparison as method in empirical social research.]. In: SWS-Rundschau 31, 4; 551-568.
Kvist, J. (2002) Is the Nordic welfare model viable? In: Nordic Journal of Social Work, Oct 2002: 20-30.
Lipsky, M. (1980) Street-level bureaucracy - dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
Mae, M. & Saal, B. (2007) Transkulturelle Genderforschung. Ein Studienbuch zum Verhältnis von Kultur und Geschlecht. [Transcultural gender studies. A reader on culture and gender]. Wiesbaden: VS Publisher.
Yuval-Davis, N. (2005) Gender mainstreaming och intersektionalitet [Gender mainstreaming and intersectionality]. In: Kvinnovetenskaplig tidskrift 2-3.05, pp. 19–30.
Otto, H.-U. & Lorenz, W. (1999) Editorial. In: European Journal of Social Work, 2(1): 1-2.

Fotnot 1
In the book VÄLFÄRDSPOLITIK I PRAKTIKEN. Om perspektiv och metoder i forskning (Brunnberg & Cedersund, 2007) produced by our earlier NSU krets there are three imperatives formulated as a thesis and ground for new welfare research. 1.Use different empirical material in the welfare studies – let different voices be heard! 2. Vary scientific traditions that are used! 3. Make more comparative research! (Cedersund & Brunnberg, 2007). In the book there are examples and presentations of comparative methods. We show how results of comparative studies can produce new dimensions of knowledge about the welfare system and consequences for special groups of citizens.
2 The debate around intersectionality has its roots in the late 1970s when black feminists and feminists belonging to other minority groups entered the political arena (Brah & Phoenix, 2004).