From dissent to authoritarianism: What role for social work in confronting the climate crisis?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11157/anzswj-vol34iss3id927Keywords:
Climate, climate justice, social justice, dissent, social work, social policy, welfare states.Abstract
INTRODUCTION: As the environmental crisis deepens and the effects begin to emerge in the form of disruptive and destructive climate events, more nation-states have ostensibly committed to carbon net zero by 2050. Achieving this target will require a major reconstitution of economies, societies and, thus, the lived realties of peoples. This reconstitution or shift will need to occur most forcibly and rapidly in the developed economies of the global north whom, since about 1850, have been responsible for approximately 92% of surplus global emissions. Social policies, therefore, will need to be reworked and reimagined so that, in practice, they are aligned with “planetary boundaries”. Recent geopolitical summits, such as COP 26, have, arguably, resulted in lacklustre and vague commitments rather than any serious attempts at creating agreement on how to reconstitute the economies of the global north. Moreover, a model of economy predicated on continuous, and exponential growth and thus the continued metabolization of the natural environment, still appears immovable despite the threat it poses.
APPROACH, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION: It is against the backdrop of the global context described above that two questions are posed. The first is concerned with creating a focus for social work and asks: “What sustainable social policies should social work align with?”. The answer to this is presented as a means of progressing the task of social work in the context of climate justice. The second question builds on the answer to the first and asks, “Does arriving at an adequate response require dissent?”
References
Australian Association of Social Workers (AASW). (2004). Acknowledgement statement to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. National Bulletin, 14(1), 21
Agamben, G. (1998). Homo sacer: Sovereign power and bare life. Stanford University Press.
Atkinson, A. B. (1996). The case for a participation income. The Political Quarterly, 67(1), 67–70.
Bailey, D. (2020). Re-thinking the fiscal and monetary political economy of the green state. New Political Economy, 25(1), 5–17.
Baumberg, B. (2015). The stigma of claiming benefits: a quantitative study. Journal of Social Policy, 45(2), 181–99.
Boetto, H., Bowles, W., Närhi, K., & Powers, M. (2020). Raising awareness of transformative ecosocial work: Participatory action research with Australian practitioners. International Journal of Social Welfare, 29, 300–309.
Bolton, R., Whelan, J., & Dukelow, F. (2022). What can welfare stigma do? Social Policy and Society, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746422000185
Bonvin, J.-M. (2012). Individual working lives and collective action. An introduction to capability for work and capability for voice. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 18(1), 9–18.
Bonvin, J.-M., & Laruffa, F. (2018). Human beings as receivers, doers and judges. The anthropological foundations of sustainable public action in the capability approach. Community, Work and Family, 21(5), 502–518.
Bonvin, J.-M., & Laruffa, F. (2021). Towards a capability- oriented eco-social policy: elements of a normative framework. Social Policy and Society, 1–12. https://doi. org/10.1017/S1474746421000798
Brake, M., & Bailey R. (Eds.). (1980). Radical Social Work and Practice. Edward Arnold.
Burchardt, T., & Hick, R. (2018). Inequality, advantage and the capability approach. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 19(1), 38–52.
Burkett, P. (1999). Marx and nature: A red and green perspective. Palgrave Macmillan.
Bywaters, P., Featherstone, B., & The Child Welfare Inequalities Project Team. (2020). The Child Welfare Inequalities Project: Final Report. University of Huddersfield.
Coote, A. (2021). Towards a sustainable welfare state: The role of universal basic services. Social Policy and Society, 1–11.
Coote, A., & Percy, A. (2020). The case for universal basic services. Polity Press.
Corrigan, P., & Leonard, P. (1978). Social work practice under capitalism: A Marxist approach. Macmillan.
Czyzewski, K., & Tester, F. (2014). Social work, colonial history and engaging indigenous self-determination. Canadian Social Work Review / Revue Canadienne de Service Social, 31(2) 211–226.
Dillon, J., Evans, F., & Wroe, L. E. (2021). Covid-19: changing fields of social work practice with children and young people. Critical and Radical Social Work, 9(2), 289–296.
Dominelli, L. (2014). Promoting environmental justice through green social work practice: A key challenge for practitioners and educators. International Social Work, 57(4), 338–345.
Drolet, J., Wu, H., Taylor, M., & Dennehy, A. (2015). Social work and sustainable social development: teaching and learning strategies for “green social work” curriculum. Social Work Education, 34(5), 528–543.
Fanning, A. L., O’Neill, D. W., & Büchs, M. (2020). Provisioning systems for a good life within planetary boundaries. Global Environmental Change, 64, https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102135.
Feldman, G. (2021). Disruptive social work: Forms, possibilities and tensions. The British Journal of Social Work. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcab045
Ferguson, I. (2008). Re-claiming social work: Challenging neo-liberalism and promoting social justice. Sage.
Ferguson, I., & Woodward, R. (2009). Radical social work. Making a difference. Policy Press.
Fook, J. (1993). Radical social work: A theory of practice. Allen and Unwin.
Fronek, P., & Chester, P. (2016). Moral outrage: Social workers in the third space. Ethics and Social Welfare, 1–14.
Galper, J. (1980). Social work practice: A radical perspective. Prentice-Hall.
Garrett, P. M. (2021). Dissenting social work. Routledge.
Gough, I. (2017). Heat, greed and human need: Climate change, capitalism and sustainable wellbeing. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Gough, I. (2022). Two scenarios for sustainable welfare: A framework for an eco-social contract. Social Policy and Society, 21(3). pp. 460-472.
Gray, C. (2019). “You look a little bit dark for my liking”: Maori and Pasifika women’s experiences of welfare receipt in Aotearoa New Zealand. Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work, 31(1), 5–16.
Harris, C., & Boddy, J. (2017). The natural environment in social work education: A content analysis of Australian social work courses. Australian Social Work, 70(3), 337–349.
Healy, K. (2000). Social work practices: Contemporary perspectives on change. Sage.
Hick, R., & Murphy, M. P. (2021). Common shock, different paths? Comparing social policy responses to COVID-19 in the UK and Ireland. Social Policy & Administration, 55, 312– 325.
Holbrook, A. M., Akbar, G. L., & Eastwood, J. (2019). Meeting the challenge of human-induced climate change: Reshaping social work education. Social Work Education, 38, 955–967.
Hyslop, I. (2018). Neoliberalism and social work identity. European Journal of Social Work, 21(1), 20–31.
Ife, J. (1997). Rethinking social work: Towards a critical practice. Longman.
Ife, J. (2018). Right-wing populism and social work: Contrasting ambivalences about modernity. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 3, 121–127.
International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW. (2022). Global definition of social work. https://www.ifsw.org/ what-is-social-work/global-definition-of-social-work/
International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW). (2022). The role of social workers in advancing a new eco-social world. https://www.ifsw.org/the-role-of-social-workers-in- advancing-a-new-eco-social-world/
Jacobs, M. D. (2009). White mother to a dark race: Settler colonialism, maternalism, and the removal of indigenous children in the American West and Australia, 1880–1940. University of Nebraska Press.
Koch, M. (2021). Social policy without growth: Moving towards sustainable welfare states. Social Policy and Society, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1474746421000361
Krumer-Nevo, M. (2016). Poverty-aware social work: A paradigm for social work practice with people in poverty. British Journal of Social Work, 46(6), 1793–1808.
Laruffa, F. (2020). What is a capability-enhancing social policy? Individual autonomy, democratic citizenship and the insufficiency of the employment-focused paradigm. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 21(1), 1–16.
Laruffa, F., McGann, M., Murphy, M. (2021). Enabling participation income for an eco-social state. Social Policy and Society, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1474746421000750
Lavalette, M. (Ed.). (2011). Radical social work today. Social work at the crossroads. Policy Press.
Lucas-Darby, E. T. (2011). The new color is green: Social work practice and service-learning. Advances in Social Work, 12, 113–125.
Lynch, D., Lathouras, A., & Forde, C. (2021). Community development and social work teaching and learning in a time of global interruption. Community Development Journal, 56(4), 566–586.
Maglajlic, A. R., & Ioakimidis, V. (2021). Social work and the quest for environment justice: A call to action. The British Journal of Social Work, 51(8), 2869–2871.
Malier, H. (2019). Greening the poor: The trap of moralization. British Journal Sociology, 70, 1661–1680.
Marx, K. (1867/2013). Das kapital. Wordsworth. McGann, M. (2021). “Double activation”: Workfare meets
marketisation. Administration, 69 2), 19–42.
Mittiga, R. (2021). Political legitimacy, authoritarianism, and climate change. American Political Science Review, 1–14.
Mullaly, B. (2002). Challenging oppression: A critical social work approach. Oxford University Press.
Mullaly, R. (1993). Structural social work: Ideology, theory and practice. McClelland and Stewart.
Noble, C. (2016). Green social work: The next frontier for action. Social Alternatives, 35(4), 14–19.
Oxfam. (2022). Inequality kills. The unparalleled action needed to combat unprecedented inequality in the wake of COVID-19: Report. https://www.oxfam.org/en/ research/inequality-kills
Patrick, R. (2017). For whose benefit: The everyday realties of welfare reform. Policy Press.
Philip, D., & Reisch, M. (2015). Rethinking social work’s interpretation of “environmental justice”: From local to global. Social Work Education, 34(5), 471–483.
Price, R. (1772). An appeal to the public, on the subject of the national debt. https://macsphere.mcmaster.ca/ bitstream/11375/14773/1/fulltext.pdf
Ranta-Tyrkkö, S., & Närhi, K. (2021). Striving to strengthen the ecosocial framework in social work in Finland. Community Development Journal, 56(4), 608–625.
Robinson, K., Briskman, L., Mayar, R. (2021). Disrupting human rights: A social work response to the lockdown of social housing residents. The British Journal of Social Work, 51(5), 1700–1719.
Sen, A. (1985). Well-being, agency and freedom: The Dewey lectures 1984. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169–221.
Sen, A. (1987). The standard of living. The Tanner lectures on human values 1985. In G. Hawthorn (Ed.), The standard of living (pp. 1–38). Cambridge University Press.
Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Knopf.
Sen, A. (2004). Inequality reexamined. Oxford University
Press.
Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. Allen Lane.
Sen, A. (2013). The ends and means of sustainability. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 14(1), 6–20.
Smith, L. (2014). Historiography of South African social work: Challenging dominant discourses. Social Work/ Maatskaplike Werk, 50(2) pp. 305-313.
Teixeira, S., & Krings, A. (2015). Sustainable social work: An environmental justice framework for social work education. Social Work Education, 34(5), 513–527.
The Promise Scotland. (2021). Plan 21–24. https:// thepromise.scot/ plan-21-24/
Turbett, C. (2014). Doing radical social work. Palgrave Macmillan.
Walker, G. (2012). Environmental justice: Concepts, evidence and politics. Routledge.
Whelan, J. (2021a). Work and thrive or claim and skive: Experiencing the “toxic symbiosis” of worklessness and welfare recipiency in Ireland. Irish Journal of Sociology, 29(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0791603520957203
Whelan, J. (2021b). Specters of Goffman: Impression management in the Irish welfare space. Journal of Applied Social Science, 15(1), 47–65. https://doi. org/10.1177/1936724420983578
Whelan, J. (2021c). We have our dignity, yeah? Scrutiny under suspicion: Experiences of welfare conditionality in the Irish social protection system. Social Policy & Administration, (55), 34–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/ spol.12610
Whelan, J. (2021d). Welfare, deservingness and the logic of poverty: Who deserves? CSP.
Whelan, J. (2022a). On your Marx...? A world to win or the dismantlement of a profession? On why we need a reckoning. The British Journal of Social Work, 52(2), 1168–1181. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcab132
Whelan, J. (2022b). Hidden voices: Lived experiences in the Irish welfare space. Policy Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
By completing the online submission process, you confirm you accept this agreement. The following is the entire agreement between you and the Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers (ANZASW) and it may be modified only in writing.
You and any co-authors
If you are completing this agreement on behalf of co-authors, you confirm that you are acting on their behalf with their knowledge.
First publication
By submitting the work you are:
- granting the ANZASW the right of first publication of this work;
- confirming that the work is original; and
- confirming that the work has not been published in any other form.
Once published, you are free to use the final, accepted version in any way, as outlined below under Copyright.
Copyright
You assign copyright in the final, accepted version of your article to the ANZASW. You and any co-authors of the article retain the right to be identified as authors of the work.
The ANZASW will publish the final, accepted manuscript under a Creative Commons Attribution licence (CC BY 4.0). This licence allows anyone – including you – to share, copy, distribute, transmit, adapt and make commercial use of the work without needing additional permission, provided appropriate attribution is made to the original author or source.
A human-readable summary of the licence is available from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0, which includes a link to the full licence text.
Under this licence you can use the final, published version of the article freely – such as depositing a copy in your institutional research repository, uploading a copy to your profile on an academic networking site or including it in a different publication, such as a collection of articles on a topic or in conference proceedings – provided that original publication in Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work is acknowledged.
This agreement has no effect on any pre-publication versions or elements, which remain entirely yours, and to which we claim no right.
Reviewers hold copyright in their own comments and should not be further copied in any way without their permission.
The copyright of others
If your article includes the copyright material of others (e.g. graphs, diagrams etc.), you confirm that your use either:
- falls within the limits of fair dealing for the purposes of criticism and review or fair use; OR
- that you have gained permission from the rights holder for publication in an open access journal.
