Dignity-based practices in Norwegian activation work
Corresponding Author
Carolina Ohls
Faculty of Social Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway
Carolina Ohls, Faculty of Social Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, PO Box 4, St. Olavs plass, NO-0130 Oslo, Norway
E-mail: carolina.ohls@oslomet.no
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Carolina Ohls
Faculty of Social Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway
Carolina Ohls, Faculty of Social Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, PO Box 4, St. Olavs plass, NO-0130 Oslo, Norway
E-mail: carolina.ohls@oslomet.no
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
This qualitative study sought to identify dignity-based practices in a Norwegian activation programme − the Qualification Programme. Some welfare recipients are likely to experience shame in connection with their interaction with the welfare system. Previous research suggests that a dignity-based approach could help welfare recipients to avoid such negative experiences. The operational components of dignity have been identified as autonomy, empathy and rights. Data gathered through individual interviews with participants and activation workers were examined using interpretative phenomenological analysis with a focus on exploring respondents’ perceptions of events to which they ascribe meaning. The findings indicate that accounts of empathy were common, but that the study’s participants seldom reported experiencing that their autonomy and rights were enhanced. Participation in the programme appeared to undermine the participants’ dignity, particularly when individual needs were overlooked. An underlying reason could be the current move away from a comprehensive understanding of service users’ different needs and to a narrow focus on employability.
References
- Anderson, J. & Honneth, A. (2005). Autonomy, vulnerability, recognition, and justice. In: J. Christman & J. Anderson (Eds.), Autonomy and the challenges to liberalism (pp. 127–149). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/CBO9780511610325.008 Google Scholar
- Baker, R. (2003). The social work dictionary ( 5th ed.). Washington, DC: NASW Press.
- Batson, C. D. (2011). Altruism in humans. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
- Baumberg, B. (2016). The stigma of claiming benefits: A quantitative study. Journal of Social Policy, 45(2), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279415000525
- Biggerstaff, D. & Thompson, A. R. (2008) Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA): A qualitative methodology of choice in healthcare research. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 5(3), 214–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780880802314304
10.1080/14780880802314304 Google Scholar
- Bothfeld, S. & Betzelt, S. (2013) Can individual autonomy be an appropriate normative concept to cope with present challenges of the welfare state? In: G. Ramia, K. Farnsworth, & Z. Irving (Eds.), Social Policy Review 25: Analysis and debate in social policy, 2013 (pp. 249–270). Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
- Brodtkorb, E. (2017) Individualisering av tjenester i et aktiveringsprogram − en studie av veilederfellesskapet i Kvalifiseringsprogrammet [Individualisation of services in an activation programme – A study of activation workers’ community in the Qualification Programme] (Doctoral thesis). Høgskolen i Oslo og Akershus, Senter for profesjonsstudier, Oslo, Norway.
- Burchardt, T. & Holder, H. (2012) Developing survey measures of inequality of autonomy in the UK. Social Indicators Research, 106(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9797-6
- Caswell, D., Kupka, P., Larsen, F., & van Berkel, R. (2017). The frontline delivery of welfare-to-work in context. In: R. van Berkel, D. Caswell, P. Kupka, & F. Larsen (Eds.), Frontline delivery of welfare-to-work policies in Europe, activating the unemployed (pp. 1–11). New York, NY: Routledge.
10.4324/9781315694474-1 Google Scholar
- Chan, C. K. (2004). Placing dignity at the centre of welfare policy. International Social Work, 47(2), 227–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872804041415
- Chase, E. & Bantebya-Kyomuhendo, G. (2015). Poverty and shame: Global experiences. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
- Christman, J. & Anderson, J. (2005). Introduction. In: J. Christman & J. Anderson (Eds.), Autonomy and the challenges to liberalism (pp. 1–25). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/CBO9780511610325.003 Google Scholar
- Circular No. 35 to the Social Security Act 4.29.1.1. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.nav.no/rettskildene/Rundskriv/hovednr.35-lov-om-sosiale-tjenester-i-nav#kvalifiseringsprogram
- Djuve, A. B., Nielsen, A. R., & Strand, H. A. (2012). Kvalifiseringsprogrammet og sosialhjelpsutgiftene [The Qualification Programme and social assistance expenditures]. Oslo: Fafo. Retrieved from https://www.fafo.no/media/com_netsukii/20290.pdf
- Evans, S. (2017) What should social welfare seek to achieve? Applying the capability approach. Ethics and Social Welfare, 11(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/17496535.2016.1234632
- FRA (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights). (2017). Second European Union minorities and discrimination survey − Main results. Luxembourg: Publication Office of the European Union. Retrieved from http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2017/eumidis-ii-main-result
- Gubrium, E., Johnstone, L., & Lodemel, I. (2016). Building dignity? Tracing rights, discretion, and negotiation within a Norwegian labor activation program. International Journal of Social Quality, 6(2), 52. https://doi.org/10.3167/IJSQ.2016.060205
10.3167/IJSQ.2016.060205 Google Scholar
- Gubrium, E. K. & Lødemel, I. (2014). “Not good enough”: Social assistance and shaming in Norway. In: E. K. Gubrium, S. Pellissery, & I. Lødemel (Eds.), The shame of it (pp. 85–110). Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
- Healy, L. M. (2011). Defining international social work. In: L. M. Healy & R. J. Link (Eds.), Handbook of international social work: human rights, development, and the global profession (pp. 9–16). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195333619.003.0002 Google Scholar
- Hoffman, M. L. (2000). Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and justice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/CBO9780511805851 Google Scholar
- Ife, J. (2012). Human rights and social work: Towards rights-based practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/CBO9781139197182 Google Scholar
- International Federation of Social Workers. (2014). Global definition of social work. Retrieved from https://www.ifsw.org/what-is-social-work/global-definition-of-social-work/
- Lima, I. A. Å. & Furuberg, J. (2018). Hvem starter i Kvalifiseringsprogrammet og kommer de i arbeid? [Who joins the Qualification Programme and do they become employed?] Arbeid og velferd, 3, 1–22.
- Margalit, A. (1996). The decent society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Marston, G. (2013). On ‘activation workers’ perceptions: A reply to Dunn (1). Journal of Social Policy, 42(4), 819–827. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047279413000482
- Midtbøen, A. H. (2015). The context of employment discrimination: Interpreting the findings of a field experiment. British Journal of Sociology, 66(1), 193–214. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12098
- Misztal, B. A. (2012). The idea of dignity: Its modern significance. European Journal of Social Theory, 16(1), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431012449237
- Nav (The Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration). (2019). Kvalifiseringsprogrammet [The Qualification Programme]. Retrieved from https://www.nav.no/no/Person/Flere+tema/Sosiale+tjenester/Nynorsk/kvalifiseringsprogrammet-kvp
- Nussbaum, M. C. (2001). Women and human development: The capabilities approach (Vol. 3). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Nussbaum, M. C. (2009). Frontiers of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Nussbaum, M. C. (2011). Creating capabilities: The human development approach. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10.4159/harvard.9780674061200 Google Scholar
- OECD. (2017). OECD Employment Outlook 2017. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/empl_outlook-2017-en
10.1787/empl_outlook-2017-en Google Scholar
- Ohls, C. (2017). A qualitative study exploring matters of ill-being and well-being in Norwegian activation policy. Social Policy and Society, 16(4), 593–606. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746416000397
- Perlinski, M., Blom, B., Morén, S., & Lundgren, M. (2010) The dialectics between specialization and integration: Politicians’ and managers’ views on forms of organization in the Swedish social services. Administration in Social Work, 35(1), 60–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/03643107.2011.533624
10.1080/03643107.2011.533624 Google Scholar
- Pyles, L. (2006). Toward a post-Katrina framework: Social work as human rights and capabilities. Journal of Comparative Social Welfare, 22(1), 79–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/17486830500523086
10.1080/17486830500523086 Google Scholar
- Raeymaeckers, P. (2016). A specialist’s perspective on the value of generalist practice: A qualitative network analysis. Journal of Social Work, 16(5), 610–626. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017316644693
- Raeymaeckers, P. & Dierckx, D. (2013). To work or not to work? The role of the organisational context for social workers’ perceptions on activation. British Journal of Social Work, 43(6), 1170–1189. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcs048
- Raffass, T. (2017). Demanding activation. Journal of Social Policy, 46(2), 349–365. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004727941600057X
- Reichborn-Kjennerud, K. (2009) En ny mulighet: Brukernes opplevelse av Kvalifiseringsprogrammet i Nav [A new opportunity: Participants’ experiences of the Qualification Programme]. Oslo, Norway: Arbeidsforskningsinstituttet. Retrieved from http://www.hioa.no/Om-HiOA/Senter-for-velferds-og-arbeidslivsforskning/AFI/Publikasjoner-AFI/En-ny-mulighet-brukernes-opplevelse-av-Kvalifiseringsprogrammet-i-NAV
10.7577/afi/notat/2009:11 Google Scholar
- Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2006). Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: Does psychology need choice, self-determination, and will? Journal of Personality, 74(6), 1557–1585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00420.x
- Sayer, R. A. (2011). Why things matter to people: Social science, values and ethical life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/CBO9780511734779 Google Scholar
- Schafft, A. & Spjelkavik, Ø. (2011). Evaluering av Kvalifiseringsprogrammet: Sluttrapport [Evaluation of the Qualification Programme: Final report]. Oslo, Norway: Arbeidsforskningsinstituttet. Retrieved from http://evalueringsportalen.no/evaluering/evaluering-av-kvalifiseringsprogrammet-sluttrapport/AFI%20Kvalifiseringsprogr%202011-4.pdf/@@inline
10.7577/afi/rapport/2011:4 Google Scholar
- Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. In: M. C. Nussbaum & A. Sen (Eds.), The quality of life (pp. 30–51). Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
10.1093/0198287976.003.0003 Google Scholar
- Sen, A. (2004). Elements of a theory of human rights. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 32(4), 315–356.
- Sennett, R. (2012). Together: The rituals, pleasures and politics of cooperation. Yale, Connecticut: Yale University Press.
- Shuman, A. (2006). Entitlement and empathy in personal narrative. Narrative Inquiry, 16(1), 148–155.
- Smith, A. J. & Osborn, M. (2007). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In: J. A. Smith (Ed.) Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to methods (pp. 53–80). London, UK: Sage Publications.
10.4135/9781446207536.d10 Google Scholar
- Spicker, P. (1990). Social work and self-determination. British Journal of Social Work, 20(3), 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjsw.a055683
- Staub-Bernasconi, S. (2012). Human rights and their relevance for social work as theory and practice. In: L. M. Healy & R. J. Link (Eds.) Handbook of international social work: Human rights, development, and the global profession (pp. 30–37). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
- Staub-Bernasconi, S. (2016). Social work and human rights – Linking two traditions of human rights in social work. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 1(1), 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-016-0005-0
- Tangney, J. P. & Dearing, R. L. (2002). Shame and guilt. New York, NY: Guildford.
10.4135/9781412950664.n388 Google Scholar
- Terum, L. I., Tufte, P. A., & Jessen, T. J. (2012). Arbeidslinja og sosialarbeiderne [The work approach and social workers]. In: E. Øverbye & S. Stjernø (Eds.), Arbeidslinja: arbeidsmotivasjonen og velferdsstaten [The work approach work motivation and the welfare state] (pp. 79–33). Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
- The Norwegian Centre for Research Data. (2018). Data protection official for research. Retrieved from http://www.nsd.uib.no/nsd/english/pvo.html
- Titmuss, R. (2006). Universalism versus selection. In: F. G. Castles & C. Pierson (Eds.) The Welfare state reader ( 2nd ed., pp. 40–49). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
- Tønseth, H. (2018) Færre avbryter Kvalifseringsprogrammet – flere i jobb etterpå [Fewer interrupt the Qualification Programme – More gain employment after participation]. Retrieved from https://www.ssb.no/sosiale-forhold-og-kriminalitet/artikler-og-publikasjoner/faerre-avbryter-kvalifiseringsprogrammet-flere-i-jobb-etterpa
- Underlid, K. (2007). Poverty and experiences of insecurity. A qualitative interview study of 25 long-standing recipients of social security. International Journal of Social Welfare, 16(1), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2397.2006.00423.x
- van Berkel, R. & Knies, E. (2016). Performance management, caseloads and the frontline provision of social services. Social Policy & Administration, 50(1), 59–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12150
- Vizard, P., Fukuda-Parr, S., Elson, D. (2011). Introduction: The capability approach and human rights. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 12(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2010.541728
- Walker, R. (2014). The shame of poverty. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684823.001.0001 Google Scholar
- Walker, R., Kyomuhendo, G. B., Chase, E., Choudhry, S., Gubrium, E. K., Nicola, J. Y., … Ming, Y. (2013). Poverty in global perspective: Is shame a common denominator? Journal of Social Policy, 42(2), 215–233. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279412000979
- Wright, S. (2013). On ‘activation workers’ perceptions’: A reply to Dunn (2). Journal of Social Policy, 42(4), 829–837. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047279413000494