<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

HAL
open science

Transnational Social Work and Social Welfare

Beatrix Schwarzer, Ursula Kämmerer-Rütten, Alexandra

Schleyer-Lindenmann, Yafang Wang

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

To cite this version:

Beatrix Schwarzer, Ursula Kämmerer-Rütten, Alexandra Schleyer-Lindenmann, Yafang Wang (Dir.). Transnational Social Work and Social Welfare., 2016, 10.4324/9781315691794 . hal-03665326

HAL Id: hal-03665326

https://hal.science/hal-03665326

Submitted on 11 May 2022

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Transnational Social Work and
Social Welfare

Challenges for the social work profession

Edited by

Beatrix Schwarzer, Ursula Kämmerer-
Rütten, Alexandra Schleyer-
Lindenmann and Yafang Wang

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>
Transnational Social Work
and Social Welfare

The underlying frame of social work is the nation state, and it is from within the state that welfare strategies and social policies are devised and implemented. However, post-colonialism, globalisation, migration and the associated implications for human rights, social justice and social welfare policies contest the idea of a clearly defined space for social work and present new challenges for researchers and practitioners.

*Transnational Social Work and Social Welfare* argues for the increased importance of the transnational perspective in social work theory and practice. The book challenges the idea of the nation state as a given entity and argues that globalisation and an increasing number of people crossing borders must have an impact on the theories and strategies of social work. The international contributors are critical of a restricted focus on a geographically defined space and the impact on work with clients.

With cases covering China, France, Germany, India, Israel, Malaysia, Turkey and the UK, the book highlights the challenges as well as the opportunities this new perspective can open up for theories and strategies in social work. It will be of interest to students, researchers and social workers interested in migration, social care, poverty and cultural competency in health and social care.

**Beatrix Schwarzer** is Senior Lecturer at the Department of Health and Social Work at Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences, Germany.

**Ursula Kämmerer-Rütten** is Senior Lecturer at the Department of Health and Social Work at Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences, Germany.

**Alexandra Schleyer-Lindenmann** is Associate Professor of Psychology at the Science Faculty of Aix-Marseille University, France.

**Yafang Wang** is Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Work, Shanghai University, China.
# Routledge Advances in Social Work

## New titles

**Analysing Social Work Communication**

Discourse in Practice

Christopher Hall, Kirsi Juhila, Maureen Matarese and Carolus van Nijnatten

**Feminisms in Social Work Research**

Promise and possibilities for justice-based knowledge

Stéphanie Wahab, Ben Anderson-Nathe and Christina Gringeri

**Chronic Illness, Vulnerability and Social Work: Autoimmunity and the Contemporary Disease Experience**

Liz Walker and Elizabeth Price

**Social Work in a Global Context**

Issues and Challenges

George Palattiyil, Dina Sidhva and Mono Chakrabarti

**Contemporary Feminisms in Social Work Practice**

Nicole Moulding and Sarah Wendt

**Domestic Violence Perpetrators**

Evidence-Informed Responses

John Devaney and Anne Lazenbatt

**Transnational Social Work and Social Welfare**

Challenges for the Social Work Profession

Beatrix Schwarzer, Ursula Kämmerer-Riitten, Alexandra Schleyer-Lindenmann and

Yafang Wang

**The Ecosocial Transition of Societies**

The Contribution of Social Work and Social Policy

Aila-Leena Matthies and Kati Närhi

## Forthcoming titles

**Responsibilization at the Margins of Welfare Services**

Kirsi Juhila, Suvi Raitakari and Christopher Hall

**Homelessness and Social Work**

An Intersectional Approach

Carole Zufferey

**Supporting Care Leavers' Educational Transitions**

Jennifer Driscoll
# Transnational Social Work and Social Welfare

## Challenges for the social work profession

Edited by Beatrix Schwarzer,

Ursula Kämmerer-Rütten,

Alexandra Schleyer-Lindenmann

and Yafang Wang

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

Routledge

Taylor & Francis Group

LONDON AND NEW YORK
First published 2016

by Routledge

2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN

and by Routledge

711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017

*Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business*

© 2016 B. Schwarzer, U. Kämmerer-Rütten, A. Schleyer-Lindenmann and Y. Wang.

The right of the editors to be identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

*Trademark notice:* Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

*British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data*

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

*Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data*

Names: Schwarzer, Beatrix, editor. | Kämmerer-Rütten, Ursula, editor. |

Schleyer-Lindenmann, Alexandra, editor. | Wang, Yafang, editor.

Title: Transnational social work and social welfare : challenges for the social work profession / edited by Beatrix Schwarzer, Ursula

Kämmerer-Rütten, Alexandra Schleyer-Lindenmann and Yafang Wang.

Other titles: Routledge advances in social work.

Description: Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge, 2016. | Series:

Routledge advances in social work | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2016008814 | ISBN 9781138912786 (hardback) | ISBN 9781315691794 (ebook)

Subjects: | MESH: Social Work | Social Welfare | Internationality

Classification: LCC HV40 | NLM HV 40 | DDC 361--dc23

LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2016008814

ISBN: 978-1-138-91278-6 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-1-315-69179-4 (ebk)

Typeset in Times New Roman

by Saxon Graphics Ltd, Derby
# Contents

<table><tr><td>List of illustrations</td><td>x</td></tr><tr><td>List of contributors</td><td>xi</td></tr><tr><td>Preface</td><td>xxiv</td></tr><tr><td>Acknowledgements</td><td>xxx</td></tr><tr><td>A note on terminology and comparisons</td><td>xxxi</td></tr><tr><td>Abbreviations</td><td>xxxiii</td></tr></table>

## PART I

**Theoretical Perspectives**

URSULA KÄMMERER-RÜTTEN, ALEXANDRA SCHLEYER-LINDENMANN, BEATRIX SCHWARZER AND YAFANG WANG

1 **Transnational social work: an introduction**

BEATRIX SCHWARZER

2 **International social work – an overview**

UTE STRAUB

3 **Towards an integrated theoretical framework for transnational social work**

ARVIND KUMAR AGRAWAL

4 **Social work as a human rights profession?**

DAGMAR OBERLIES

## PART II

**Country Profiles**

URSULA KÄMMERER-RÜTTEN, ALEXANDRA SCHLEYER-LINDENMANN, BEATRIX SCHWARZER AND YAFANG WANG
**5 Social welfare and the development of professional social work in China**

50

XIAOXIAO XIE AND YAFANG WANG

**6 Social action in France: issues and development**

58

NATHALIE JAMI, YVES PILLANT AND NATHALIE SEGURA

**7 Social policy and social work in Germany**

66

URSULA KÄMMERER-RÜTTEN

**8 Social welfare and social work in Britain**

75

CAROLINE HUMPHREY

**9 Evolution of professional social work in India and transnational issues faced**

84

ARVIND KUMAR AGRAWAL AND ASUTOSH PRADHAN

**10 The development of social welfare services and the social work profession in Israel**

92

MERAV MOSHE GRODOFSKY

**11 Social welfare in Malaysia: provision and limitation**

100

KARTINI ABOO TALIB

**12 A profile of the Turkish social welfare system and social work**

107

SEMA BUZ

PART III

**Case Studies**

115

URSULA KÄMMERER-RÜTTEN, ALEXANDRA SCHLEYER-LINDENMANN, BEATRIX SCHWARZER AND YAFANG WANG

**13 Educational inequality of migrant children and school social work interventions**

120

DIQING JIANG, SHANMIN PENG AND YAFANG WANG

**14 Migrant children and social work interventions in India**

128

Comment on the Chinese case study from an Indian perspective

SHEWLI KUMAR
15 The response to educational inequality between cities and the countryside and school social services: migration from the countryside to cities and its impacts upon the education system 133

*Comment on the Chinese case study from a Turkish perspective*

UĞUR TEKIN

16 Refugees and asylum seekers in France 138

MURIEL MELLON-MUSTAFA AND ALEXANDRA SCHLEYER-LINDENMANN

17 Legitimacy versus legality 146

*Comment on the French case study from a German perspective*

THERESE NEUER-MIEBACH

18 Seeking refuge in India 150

*Comment on the French case study from an Indian perspective*

SOHINI SENGUPTA

19 Narcotic and psychotropic drugs, transnational intersections and social work with drug users in Germany 155

IRMGARD VOGT

20 Drug use 162

*Comment on the German case study from a British perspective*

JOHN WATSON

21 Drug use and health related problems among former Soviet Union drug users in Israel: considerations for social work practice 166

*Comment on the German case study from an Israeli perspective*

RICHARD ISRALOWITZ AND ALEXANDER REZNIK

22 An exploration of issues of culture and diversity within England's statutory child protection system 170

ADRIAN BRAITHWAITE AND SARAH CRESSWELL

23 Refugee resettlement and child protection in France 177

*Comment on the British case study from a French perspective*

NATHALIE DURAND-LE ZALLIC
24 Child protection in a multicultural context 181

*Comment on the British case study from an Israeli perspective*

YOCHAY NADAN

25 Jyoti's case – a study on transnational advocacy 186

ABHA BHAIYA

26 Combating violence against women: transnational perspectives on social work in Germany 195

*Comment on the Indian case study from a German perspective*

UTE ZILLIG

27 Transnational advocacy networks: the examples of APWLD and NCWO 200

*Comment on the Indian case study from a Malayan perspective*

RASHILA RAMLI

28 Elderly people in a war zone in Israel: the impact of community resources on psychological well-being and life review intervention in a resilience center 205

IRIT REGEV

29 Elderly people with cancer in hospital in Shanghai, China: social group work intervention 213

*Comment on the Israeli case study from a Chinese perspective*

FANG YANG AND ZIQIAN XU

30 Aging and conflict outside and behind your front door 217

*Comment on the Israeli case study from a British perspective*

CHARLOTTE L. CLARKE

31 Migrant workers: statute limitation and the missing social work 221

KARTINI ABOO TALIB

32 Domestic migrant workers in China: silent victims and social work interventions 228

*Comment on the Malayan case study from a Chinese perspective*

DIQING JIANG
33 Feminisation of migration: migration in a changing world 233

Comment on the Malayan case study from a Turkish perspective

UĞUR TEKIN

34 Returnees: neither there nor here, at Araf 237

FILIZ DEMİRÖZ

35 Here and there: transnational lives of migrant workers and their families 245

Comment on the Turkish case study from a German perspective

LENA INOWLOCKI

36 Comparative experiences of migrants in Asia 249

Comment on the Turkish case study from a Malayan perspective

RASHILA RAMLI

PART IV

Last thoughts – and yet another perspective! 253

URSULA KÄMMERER-RÜTTEN, ALEXANDRA SCHLEYER-LINDENMANN, BEATRIX SCHWARZER AND YAFANG WANG

37 Crossing boundaries within and without ... the journey of a feministactivist 255

ABHA BHAIYA

Index

262
# Illustrations

## Figure

<table><tr><td>5.1 Relationships between NGOs and public/semi-public agencies in providing welfare benefits</td><td>54</td></tr></table>

## Tables

<table><tr><td>4.1 Human rights instruments (UN)</td><td>36</td></tr><tr><td>5.1 Basic structure of welfare providers in China's urban areas</td><td>54</td></tr><tr><td>13.1 Intervention methods for behavioural modification and social competence enhancement of migrant children</td><td>124</td></tr><tr><td>14.1 Social work interventions by NGOs</td><td>130</td></tr><tr><td>21.1 Former Soviet Union drug users in Israel: a gender comparison</td><td>168</td></tr><tr><td>27.1 Cases of violence fought by APWLD</td><td>202</td></tr><tr><td>27.2 Milestones in claiming rights</td><td>203</td></tr></table>
# Contributors

## Editors

**Beatrix Schwarzer** is Senior Lecturer at the Department of Health and Social Work at Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences, Germany. She graduated in Sociology from Goethe University in Frankfurt, Germany. She works in the field of social movements and transnational social work and created and implemented a new Bachelor degree course ‘Social Work: transnational’ – the first in Germany – in 2012. She teaches widely in the field of inclusion and exclusion, diversity, and international as well as transnational social work. Currently, in her PhD thesis she deals with the institutionalisation of women’s movement demands in post-1994 South Africa. Her publications in the field of transnational social work and social movements include: (2014) ‘Teilhabe als Grundlage Sozialer Arbeit’, as well as ‘Diversity als Perspektive für Soziale Arbeit’, in B. Bretländer, M. Köttig, T. Kunz, (eds), *Vielfalt und Differenz in der Sozialen Arbeit*, W. Kohlhammer; (2009) ‘Discourses on race and gender in South Africa’s transition process: A challenging liaison’, in C.J. Korieh, P. Okeke-Ihejirika, (eds), *Gendering Global Transformations*, Routledge, 220–36; and (2009) ‘Gleichheit oder Gleichgültigkeit? Vom Ende der Regenbogennation’, *Femina Politica* 18(2), 2, 74–83 (with Mageza-Barthel, R.).

**Ursula Kämmerer-Rütten**, PhD, is Senior Lecturer at the Department of Health and Social Work at Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences, Germany. She is a graduate of the University of Stirling (UK) where she completed her PhD on ‘Outcomes in Community Mental Health Care’ as a comparative analysis of social policy foundations and support options in different countries (Germany and the UK). Her academic career and professional experiences include community-based case work and social inclusion, and her teaching focus is on social work in health care with clients threatened by precarious living conditions and social exclusion. She has published on national and international social work. Her recent publications include: (2014) ‘Vielfalt im Alter’, in B. Bretländer, M. Köttig, T. Kunz, (eds), *Vielfalt und Differenz in der Sozialen Arbeit*, W. Kohlhammer; (2011) ‘International education and the cross-cultural classroom: Learning and teaching in international settings’, in *Interprofessional and International Learning Experiences in Social and Health Care Higher*
*Education*, Lahti University of Applied Sciences, Lahti, Finland; (2011) 'Ethnozentrisch oder multikulturell? Perspektiven für die interkulturelle Öffnung sozialer Dienste und Versorgungsinstitutionen für ältere MigrantInnen', in *Migration und Soziale Arbeit*, ISS Frankfurt; (2009) 'Biografiearbeit und ihre ethische Handlungsdimension: Kritische Bestandsaufnahme und Perspektiven für ein ethisch legitimiertes professionelles Handeln', *Neue Praxis*.

**Alexandra Schleyer-Lindenmann**, PhD, has studied psychology in Germany (JLU Giessen) and France (Université de Provence), where she completed her PhD. She is Associate Professor of Psychology at the Science Faculty of Aix-Marseille University. Currently she is assistant director of ESPACE lab (CNRS 7300) and director of the European Diploma of Social Sciences (DEUSS) proposed to students of social work. Her research integrates the intercultural and environmental perspective in developmental psychology with research topics such as environmentally-friendly attitudes and behaviours at different ages of life, developmental tasks and moral development. Her main publications in the field of social work are: (2013) 'L'immigration en France et en Allemagne: différences, convergences et une même interrogation pour le travail social' (with Th. Neuer-Miebach), in Ph. Hirliet, J.L. Meyer, Y. Molina and B. Muller, (eds), *Travail Social sans Frontières: Innovation et Adaptation*. Rennes: Presses de l'Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Santé Publique, 45-61; (2011) *Soziale Arbeit im Dialog. Hochschulpartnerschaft Frankfurt – Marseille. Le travail social en dialogue – le partenariat des établissements d'enseignement supérieur de Francfort-sur-le-Main et de Marseille* (co-ed. Th. Neuer-Miebach), Frankfurt: Fachhochschulverlag.

**Yafang Wang**, PhD, is Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Work, Shanghai University since 2010. She studied educational sciences first in Beijing Normal University, China, and then in Bielefeld University, Germany where she completed her PhD in 2009 on 'New Educational Chances for the Disadvantaged through Reconstruction of Online Social Capital – An Empirical Research into Informal Learning of Migrant Youth in Online Socio-cultural Networks'. She has taught Social Work Theories and Ethics of Social Work and has also been supervisor for social work students in placement. Her major research interests revolve around professionalisation and indigenisation of social work, social work and education, education inequality in migrant children, and social work with children of rural workers in China. Her recent main publications in English include: (2014) 'Educational Inequality of Rural Workers' Children in China: From Visible Exclusion to Invisible Discrimination', in Hunner-Kreise and Bohne, (eds), *Childhood, Youth and Migration – Connecting global and local perspectives*, Springer (forthcoming); 'Social Work in China – Historical development and current challenges for professionalisation', *Social Work and Society*; (2011) 'New Educational Chances for the Disadvantaged Migrant Youth through Reconstruction of Social Capital in Online Informal Learning', in Arbeitskreis 'Jugendhilfe im Wandel', (ed.), *Jugendhilfeforschung*, VS-Verlag, Wiesbaden.
**Contributors (Alphabetical order by surname)**

**Kartini Aboo Talib**, Dr, is an Associate Professor in policy analysis and Deputy Director at the Institute of Ethnic Studies, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. She was appointed as a Country Consultant for Malaysia to the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (2014), a grantee for Sumitomo Foundation Japan (2011), and a Fulbright scholar to Northeastern University, Boston Massachusetts (2000–2005). Her research focus includes civil society, gender, comparative politics, and consumerism. She has published several chapters in books and articles on various issues pertaining to policy including dispute resolutions and consumer rights, labour law and legal immigrants, gender and policy, managing consensus in a plural society, non-profits and policy implementation, election and good governance, and environmental policy and sustainability. Her book *Policy Implementation and People Processing Organisations* was published in 2014.

**Arvind Kumar Agrawal**, PhD, is currently First Vice Chancellor of Mahatma Gandhi Central University, Motihari, Bihar, India. He was Professor and Dean of the School of Fine Arts and Art Education and Controller of Examinations at the Central University of Himachal Pradesh. He finished his MA, MPhil. at JNU, and completed his PhD in Germany. He was former Professor and Head of the Department of Sociology and former Director of the Centre for Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policy at University of Rajasthan, Jaipur (India). He has been elected as Vice-President (for 2014–2018) of the Research Committee on Sociology of Law of the International Sociological Association and has been visiting professor in many European universities. His major research focuses cover Social Theory, Research Methodology and Globalisation and Sociology of Law. He has published five books and many research articles in reputed academic journals.

**Abha Bhaiya** is one of the founding members of the feminist organisation Jagori, set up in 1983 in Delhi. She has been active in women's movements in India and in the neighbouring south Asian countries for nearly 40 years. She has been working on a range of issues including women's social, political and economic rights; the status of single women; women's right to health, bodily integrity and well-being; sex and sexualities; against militarisation, fundamentalisms; on food securities and livelihoods, organic agriculture and the increasing erosion of civil rights of the poorest. She is known as a feminist trainer with extensive experience in conducting feminist training for multiple constituencies and in many different countries. In 2002 she set up a feminist retreat, TARA, in one of the villages of the lower Himalayas and also implemented a feminist community programme, now spread over nearly 150 villages. She is a member of some significant regional and transnational platforms and organisations and also the India OBR national coordinator.

**Adrian Braithwaite** is a Practice Educator and Registered Social Worker. He has a background in statutory children and families' social work and experience
working with children’s disability services. Previously he had been a tenancy
support worker for young people who required assistance to develop skills of
independent living. He has also spent time working with asylum seekers and
refugees within a hostel setting. He is currently working at the University of
Hull with social work students and undertaking research into the student
experience of supervision in the development of social work practice. His major
focus includes children and families, social work and law, providing teaching
and learning for students with early intervention strategies and developing
professional skills such as assessment across a range of social work support
needs, a systemic approach encompassing diversity, multi-agency partnerships
and a holistic approach with supporting families.

**Sema Buz**, PhD, is Associate Professor and lectures at undergraduate, master and PhD programmes at the Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Social Work, Hacettepe University, Turkey. Her major focuses in research are on asylum-refugee-migrant issues, LGBTI, old age, poverty, feminist social work, and social work ethics. Her recent publications include: (2012) (with O. Cankurtaran Ontas and B. Hatiboglu), ‘Opinions of social work students from Turkey on social justice’, *International Social Work*, 56(6); (2013) (with O. Cankurtaran Ontas and B. Hatiboglu), ‘Youth and political participation: case in Turkey’, *European Journal of Social Work*, 16(2).

**Charlotte L. Clarke** is Professor and Head of Health in Social Science at the University of Edinburgh. She is a Registered Nurse, who started working in the university sector in the 1990s at Northumbria University as a Lecturer and then as Professor and Associate Dean (Research) for the last eight years. She then moved to the University of Edinburgh as Head of School in 2011. Her major research focuses are on older people and dementia, risk and resilience theory. She is the author of more than 65 peer-reviewed papers and six books and more than 20 book chapters. Her recent publications include: (2014) (with S. Visram and M. White) ‘Making and maintaining lifestyle changes with the support of a lay health advisor: longitudinal qualitative study of health trainer services in England’, *PLoS ONE*, 9(5); (2015) (with N.A.S. Rickard) ‘The involvement of older people in their rehabilitation: generating a substantive Grounded Theory’, *International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation*, 22(8), 361–9.

**Sarah Cresswell** completed her social work degree in 1989 and became a Practice Educator in 2006, joining the University of Hull in 2010. She worked as a Practice Educator at FASU at the University of Hull where she assessed social work students. Her current role is as an Independent Reviewing Officer at Doncaster Children’s Services Trust where she chairs reviews for looked-after children and ensures that their needs are met. Her major professional focus is on transnational social work and child protection.

**Filiz Demiröz**, PhD., is Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Work, Administrative and Social Sciences Faculty of Hacettepe University, Turkey. She is a HAMER-Founding Member and HUGO Board Member. Her major
research focuses are migration, social work theories, disaster and trauma, family counselling. Her main publications include: (1989) ‘The Difficulties of Remigrant Families’, 9th ISFW European Seminar, Bildiri, Basel, Switzerland; (1998) ‘Schwierigkeiten bei der Remigration und Lösungsvorschläge’ *Chancen und Risiken von Migration*, Lambertus; (2000) ‘Yurtdışına Göç Sürecinin Aile Üzerindeki Etkileri Prof. Dr. Vedia Emiroğlu’na Armağan’, ed. G. Erkan and V. Işıkhan, 194–204, *Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Hizmetler Yüksekokulu Yayıno*, No 6, 194–204, Ankara; (2003) ‘Die Rückkehr und die damit verbundenen Schwierigkeiten’, Türkische Migrantinnen im Ausland – Probleme und Lösungsansätze, Internationales Symposium, eds N. Alkan, N. Küçükkarac, T. Temiz and E. Hermann, Ankara, 167–77; (2007) ‘Das Thema Migration im deutsch–turkischen Fachkräfteaustausch – aus türkischer Sicht’, Qualität zeigt Wirkung-Entwicklungen und Perspektiven. Forum Jugendarbeit International. IJAB. Deutschland.

**Nathalie Durand-Le Zallic**, is a social work trainer at the Institut Méditerranéen de Formation et de Recherche en Travail Social (IMF, Mediterranean Institute for Training and Research in Social Work), Marseille, since 2006. She completed her Master in Business and Social Administration, specialising in social politics and local development. She has worked as a social worker in child welfare for 20 years (Association ‘Sauvegarde 13’ in Marseille). Her major professional interests focus on social policies; protection and rights of the child; writing professional reports in child protection; social work and professional secrecy.

**Caroline Humphrey**, Dr, is Senior Lecturer in Social Work at the University of Hull. She is a registered social worker and specialised in child and family social work in statutory settings in England prior to embarking upon an academic career. She teaches modules in Child and Family Social Work, Child Protection and Court Work and Practice Skills Development. Her current research interests revolve around culture, religion and spirituality. Her major publications include: (2011) *Becoming a Social Worker: A Guide for Students*, London: Sage; (2015) ‘Evil, Child Abuse and the Caring Professions’, *Journal of Religion and Health*, 54(5), 1660–71; (2015) ‘Grand Narratives of Spirituality: Some Critical Reflections’, *Journal for the Study of Spirituality*, 5(1), 20–32.

**Lena Inowlocki**, Dr, is Professor and Managing Director of the Institute for Migration Studies and Intercultural Communication (IMiK) at the Department of Health and Social Work, Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences. She is also Professor (extraordinary) at the Department of Social Sciences, Goethe-University Frankfurt/Main. Her major research focuses are qualitative-interpretive research on transmission and change through generations in migrant families; gender, adolescence, and transformation of tradition, religion and ethnicity; European ‘identity work’; inclusion and interculturality in institutions of psychosocial care. Her main publications include: (2014) (with co-eds U. Apitzsch, D. Bertaux, C. Delcroix) ‘Thematic issue on “Socialization, family,
and gender in the context of migration””, ZQF 14. Jg., Heft 1–2; (2013)
‘Collective trajectory and generational work in families of Jewish Displaced
Persons: Epistemological processes in the research situation’, in M.L. Seeberg,
I. Levin, and C Lenz, (eds), *Holocaust as active memory: the past in the
present*. Series Memory studies: 20th and 21st century philosophy, methodology
and ontology, Vol. 1, Farnham: Ashgate, 29–43.

**Richard Isralowitz**, Dr, is Professor and Director of the Regional Alcohol and Drug Abuse Research Center, Spitzer Dept. of Social Work, Ben Gurion University. He received the US-National Institute on Drug Abuse Award for ‘Contributions to Scientific Diplomacy through Outstanding Efforts in International Collaborative Research on Drug Abuse and Addiction’. He was also awarded Distinguished International Scientist by US NIDA. He worked as Fulbright Fellow at National University of Singapore. In addition, he is advisor for Social Research and Program Development in the Middle East and Africa, Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs – International Cooperation. His research mainly focuses on patterns and problems of substance abuse and drug policy. He has published over 100 scientific articles, 12 books, and 13 chapters in edited books, as well as 16 major scientific reports focused on prevention of health and social problems among high risk populations.

**Nathalie Jami** worked as a social worker specialising in addictions for 12 years. Since 2000, she has been working as a trainer of social workers, and since 2002 as training manager at the Institut Méditerranéen de Formation et de Recherche en Travail Social (IMF, Mediterranean Institute for Training and Research in Social Work), Marseille, France. In 1988 she completed her Diploma as Assistant de Service Social at the IRTS (Regional School of Social Work) Montrouge. In 2002 she achieved her Licence (Bachelor) in Educational Sciences at the University of Provence – Aix-Marseille. In 2014 she completed her State Diploma of Social Engineering at the Collège Coopératif in Aix-en-Provence. Her main research focus is on collective social work. Her main publications include: (2014) ‘L’impact des European Credits Transfer System (ECTS) dans la formation’ (with J. Victor-Baptiste-Grebert) in *Revue française de service social, De la formation à la recherche en travail social, Défis et perspectives*, n. 252, Jan.; (2014) ‘Mémoire DEIS: Les solidarités à l’épreuve de l’Intervention Sociale d’Intérêt Collectif; Quels enjeux pour les postures professionnelles des Assistants de Service Social?’.

**Diqing Jiang** is a visiting research fellow of the School of Sociology and Political Science at Shanghai University. After his BA and MA degrees in history which he gained in China, he further studied at the political science department at Marquette University (USA) with a Master's in international relations and later studied at Brown University. He shifted to work at Cato Institute from 2006 to 2011 with a research focus on China's political economy. In 2011 he started studying at Washington University, concentrating on social development and social policy, and China's social and economic development. His main
publications include: (2015) *Poverty, State and Paradox of Tocqueville Paradox: ideas of Tocqueville's social policy*, Xuehai, Issue 1 (in Chinese); (2014) 'The challenge to Citizen Empire', *Journal of Wenhui Book Review*, August (in Chinese); (2013) 'Why social policy is a discipline?' *Journal of Wenhui Book Review*, August (in Chinese).

**Shewli Kumar**, PhD, is Associate Professor at Tata Institute of Social Sciences, India. She completed her MPhil and PhD in Social Work from Delhi University, India, and began her career with an NGO, Prerana, working with young girls in rural areas of North India. From 1999 to 2005, she worked as Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Work, University of Delhi. Her major research focuses are women, development and gender; children's rights; social policy; group work. She has published articles on adolescence, gender and reproductive rights; Dalit and excluded women, children's rights; policy analysis.

**Muriel Mellon-Mustafa** completed her studies and training as a social worker at Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences (Germany). Since 2007, she has been working as social worker in a reception centre for asylum seekers in Marseille (France). She is an undergraduate of Law at the University Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne, and currently a master's student in International and European Law at the Law Faculty of Grenoble University.

**Merav Moshe Grodofsky**, Dr, is Chair of the School of Social Work of Sapir College, and Founder as well as Academic Director of the Rights-based Community Practice Center Network. He is a specialist in teaching, practice, writing and research on human rights advocacy, community organising, and the combination of the two as a method to promote people-to-people relationships and peace-building among disadvantaged and multicultural groups within societies and between societies in conflict. His major research interests revolve around rights-based community practice, social work and human rights, and service user involvement in social work education. The following are his selected publications: (2012) 'Community-based human rights advocacy practice and peace education', *International Social Work*, 55(5), 740–53; (2007) 'The contribution of law and social work to interdisciplinary community development and peace building in the Middle East', *Journal of Community Practice*, 15(1/2), 45–65; (2001) 'Peacebuilding: A conceptual framework', *International Journal of Social Welfare*, 10, 14–26.

**Yochay Nadan**, Dr, is Lecturer and holds a tenure-track position at the Paul Baerwald School of Social Work and Social Welfare, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. His research areas include diversity and multiculturalism; culturally competent and context-informed social work practice and education; cultural and contextual aspects of child maltreatment; multicultural family therapy; narrative therapy; psychotherapy research. Selected publications include: (2013) (with A. Ben-Ari) 'What can we learn from rethinking “multiculturalism” in social work education?' *Social Work Education*, 32(8), 1089–102; (2014) 'Rethinking “Cultural Competence” in international social work', *International*
*Social Work*, Advanced online publication; (2014) (with E. Segev) 'Facing reality: Context-oriented reflection in social work education', *British Journal of Social Work*, Advanced online publication; (2015) (with J. Spilsbury and J. Korbin) 'Culture and context in understanding child maltreatment: Contributions of intersectionality and neighborhood-based research', *Child Abuse & Neglect*, 41, 40–48; (2015) (with G. Weinberg-Kurnik and A. Ben-Ari) 'Bringing context and power relations to the fore: Intergroup dialogue as a tool in social work education', *British Journal of Social Work*, 45(1), 260–77.

**Therese Neuer-Miebach**, Dr. rer. Pol., is Professor at the Department of Social Work and Health, and also teaches Civil Engineering and Geomatics at the Faculty of Architecture, Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences. She is the Head of Department of International Affairs and Ethics in a Federal Association for Mentally Handicapped People and a member of different ethics committees on national and international levels. The areas of her research activities are community and agglomeration development; urban space, social structure and housing; local social policies; 'social city' / politique de la ville and participation; urban sociology. Some selected publications are: (2010) (with AG Sozialraum) *Sozialraumuntersuchung Wohnsiedlung Riederwald – Empirische Untersuchung im Auftrag des Diakonischen Werks Frankfurt des Evangelischen Regionalverbandes Frankfurt*, Frankfurt; (2011) (with A. Schleyer-Lindenmann) *Soziale Arbeit im Dialog – Le travail social en dialogue*, Frankfurt; (2013) (with A. Schleyer-Lindenmann) 'Immigration en France et en Allemagne. Différences, convergences et une même interrogation pour le travail social', in P. Hirlet, J.L. Meyer, Y. Molina, B. Muller, (eds), *Travail Social sans frontières*, Presses de l'ÉHESP, Rouen, 45–61.

**Dagmar Oberlies**, Dr, is Professor of Law at Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences. She worked as a researcher at the Hamburg Institute for Social Research from 1984 to 1989 and as a legal practitioner from 1984 to 1992. From 1991 to 1995, she was Head of Department at the Ministry of Women, Employment, Health and Social Services in Saarland. From 1995 to 1996, she worked as research assistant for the Social Democratic parliamentary working group on legal policy. Between 2002 and 2005, she was team leader for the German Development Cooperation. In 2006 and 2014, she was guest professor at the International Islamic University and the National University of Malaysia respectively. Her major research and teaching focuses include anti-discrimination law, refugee and migration law, criminal law and criminology. Her publications include: (2015) 'Soziale Arbeit als Menschenrechtsprofession', *Sozial Extra*, 39(2), 6–9; (2015) 'Recht im Kontext von Exklusion und Inklusion', in B. Bretländer, M. Köttig and T. Kunz, (eds), *Vielfalt und Differenz in der Sozialen Arbeit*, Kohlhammer Verlag, Stuttgart, 48–59; (2014) 'Frauenkriminalität als Paradoxe Anwendung des Strafrechts', in K.H. Schäfer and H. Bunde, (eds), *Ökumenische Faktoren in der Straffälligenhilfe*, Lambertus, Freiburg im Breisgau, 117–125; (2013) *Strafrecht und Kriminologie für die Soziale Arbeit*, Kohlhammer Verlag, Stuttgart.
** Shanmin Peng** completed his PhD in 2005 at Shanghai Normal University and is currently Professor at the Department of Social Work, School of Sociology and Political Sciences, Shanghai University. He is Director of China Association of Sociology. His major research interests revolve around social work administration, community study and social policy. His main publications include: (2014) ‘NPO and Social Education Problem of Migrant Children – Based on the Case Study of Shanghai’, *Journal of Social Sciences*, 2; (2011) ‘Social Work and the Construction of Public Life’, *Study and Practice*, 7; (2011) ‘An Analysis of the Career Identity of Social Work Trade Association: A Case Study of Pudong New District’, *Fujian Tribune*, 12; (2010) ‘Seal-cutting Art Group: An Indigenous Innovation of Social Work of Drug Treatment’, *Fujian Tribune*, 7; (2010) *Exploration of Social Work Indigenization – Based on Local Practices in Shanghai*, Hefei University of Technology Press.

** Yves Pillant** completed his Bachelor in Educational Sciences in 2000 and achieved the Certificate of Abilities as Manager for Social Services in 2004. He is now a PhD candidate in political philosophy on the theme: Is a policy of vulnerability thinkable? at the Mediterranean Institute for Training and Research in Social Work (IMF), and teaches social engineering. He is manager for the development of social work’s formations towards professionals in the establishments and services of the social action field. His publications include: (2014) ‘Inclusion, word games or new paradigm for the social action?’ *Ergologia* 12; (2014) ‘Sexuality is not a need. Emotional and sexual life of adults in residential shelters’, *Le Sociographe*, 47; (2013) ‘From a society of integration to an inclusive society’, *Revue française de service social – ANAS* (French social services magazine).

** Asutosh Pradhan**, Dr, is Associate Professor and Head of Department of Social Work, School of Social Sciences at Central University of Himachal Pradesh, India. He is a leading social work educator in India with 24 years’ post-graduate teaching experience and three years’ consultancy work in the NGO/Development Sector particularly in a World Bank funded Resettlement and Rehabilitation Project titled ‘Facilitation of Community Participation in Implementation of Rehabilitation Action Plans & Indigenous People’s Development Plans’ in the Coal Mines of Odisha. He has been teaching Research Methodology, and Social Policy and Social Development. His major research interests are in the field of social capital, micro-credit, resettlement and rehabilitation, domestic violence, indigenous peoples and social exclusion and social inclusion. He has published 20 articles on social capital and micro-credit, social work advocacy, ethics, spirituality, development, and one co-authored book titled *Redress Mechanisms for Women Victims of Domestic Violence*.

** Rashila Ramli** is Principal Fellow, Professor of Political Science and Director at the Institute of Malaysian and International Studies (IKMAS), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Her areas of specialisation are Political Development, Gender and Politics, and Human Security. Her current research is on the
governance of the South China Sea and its implication on ASEAN, and promoting social inclusion through public policies. Two selected publications are: (2015) (with Sity Daud and Zarina Othman) *Human security in Archipelagic Southeast Asia*; (2011) (with Nor Azizan Idris and Zarina Othman) ‘Social Constructivism and Malaysia’s International Relations’, *Akademika* 8(1), 39–51. Her professional engagement includes, among others, President of the Malaysian Social Science Association (PSSM); member of the Council of Security Cooperation in Asia Pacific (CSCAP), Malaysia; regional council member of the Asia Pacific Forum for Women, Law and Development (APWLD); and Asst. Sec-General of the National Council for Women’s Organizations (NCWO), Malaysia.

**Irit Regev**, Dr, is a lecturer in the School of Social Work at Sapir College. She received her PhD from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. She established and manages the ‘Tzmatim Institute’ – Consultation for the Aging Population and their Families. She is engaged in gerontological research on the following subjects: the effects on the elderly of exposure to prolonged stress and threat; the effects of retirement on the individual and the influence and efficacy of retirement preparation programmes; life stories and perceptions of life and self among older adults in Israel. Her main publications include: (2010) ‘Retirement preparation programs and counseling – snapshot and reflections on the future’, *Gerontology*, 37(2–3), 155–68; (2015) (with O. Nuttman-Shwartz and R. Dekel) ‘Continuous exposure to life threats among different age groups in different types of communities’, *Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy*, 7(3), 269–76; (submitted for publication) (with O. Nuttman-Shwartz) ‘The impact of living in a continuous traumatic reality on elderly persons residing in urban and rural communities.’

**Alexander Reznik**, Dr, is currently Senior Research Associate at the Regional Alcohol and Drug Abuse Research Center, Spitzer Dept. of Social Work, Ben Gurion University. He has served as lecturer and researcher at the Military Naval Academy of Far Eastern Federal University, and as Chairman at the Department of Psychology of Maritime State University in Vladivostok, Russia. He has also worked as Consultant and Group Counsellor at the Israel Anti-Drug Authority. His major focus in research includes patterns and problems of substance abuse; immigration, acculturation and drug use. He is the author of more than 60 scientific articles; five books; eight chapters in edited books; and four major scientific reports focused on the prevention of health and social problems among high risk populations.

**Nathalie Segura** is Assistant Director of the Mediterranean Institute for Training and Research in Social Work (IMF), Marseille, France. She studied Sociology at Toulouse University and achieved additional qualifications in Human Resources, Quality Analysis and Financial Decision-Making. She has worked as a research assistant at the CIREJ Lab Toulouse and at the Paris Higher School of Social Sciences (EHESS Paris). She completed her CAFDES Diploma (Qualification
for the position as director of an institute or service of social intervention) and has
occupied positions as assistant director in several organisations in the health and
social sector. She teaches demographics, methodology in sociology, urban
sociology, action-research, evaluation of public policies, care and social sector.

**Sohini Sengupta** has a PhD in Anthropology from SOAS, University of London. She joined the Centre for Community Organization and Development Practice, School of Social Work of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences as an Assistant Professor in 2012. Prior to her academic career, she has worked in the development sector in rural India and as a research fellow with the World Commission on Dams – the secretariat’s Social Impacts Team, based in Cape Town, South Africa. Her areas of research interest are indigenous people, land rights, rural livelihoods, gender and work, poverty and social protection and food security. She teaches courses on Social Policy, Gender and Livelihoods and Ethnography for MA Social Work students. She has a major publication forthcoming: ‘Wronged by Development? The impasse in Development – Human Rights Debate’, *Journal of The National Human Rights Commission*, India.

**Ute Straub**, Dr, has been Tenured Professor for Humanities and Social Pedagogy since 1997 at Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences. She is the International Coordinator and Head of the International Committee of the Department, and a member of the International Board of the University. She also works as Head of the International Social Work Division of the German Association for Social Work. In addition to academic areas, she has practised professionally in the fields of social-pedagogical care of mentally and physically challenged young people, gender-oriented work with boys/girls with migrant backgrounds, domestic violence (shelter for mistreated women and their children), media pedagogy etc. Her research areas focus on family support (family welfare, family care, family education), international and comparative social work, history of education and social work, PR in social work /public image of social work, gender issues: working with male and female service users, domestic violence, gender-oriented perspectives on youth and family care, community development and organisation. Her publications include: (2016) “‘All my relations’ – indigene Ansätze und Relationalität in der Sozialen Arbeit’, in F. Früchtel, M. Strassner and C. Schwarzloos, (eds), *Relationale Sozialarbeit – versammelnde, vernetzende und kooperative Hilfeformen*, Weinheim, Beltz-Juventa, 54–74; (2015) ‘Machtungleichgewichte – Konflikte in der Internationalen Sozialen Arbeit. Die neue Globale Definition und indigene Soziale Arbeit’, in S. Stövesand and D. Röh, (eds), *Konflikte – theoretische und praktische Herausforderungen für die Soziale Arbeit*, Opladen, Berlin &Toronto, Verlag Barbara Budrich, 58–68; (2014) “‘Whose voice is being heard?’” - Die Diskussion um die neue Definition für Soziale Arbeit von IASSW und IFSW’, in *FORUM sozial* 2(14), 29–30; (2012) “‘Kreise schließen’-Indigenisierte Soziale Arbeit auf dem Weg in den Mainstream’, in G. Thiele, (ed.), *Gesellschaftlicher Wandel – wohin? Innovative Entwicklungen in den Sozialwissenschaften*, Berlin, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 47–63.
**Uğur Tekin**, PhD, is Professor and Head of the Social Work Department, Faculty of Health Sciences, İstanbul Aydın University. He completed his PhD at Köln University, Germany. Between 2000 and 2010, he was Academician at Köln University, Klagenfurt University and the University of Applied Sciences in Düsseldorf. Since 2011, he has worked as Academician Prof. Dr. at the Faculty of Education and Faculty of Health Sciences, İstanbul Aydın University. The areas of his research interests cover social work, migration, youth sociology and criminal sociology. Selected publications include: (2003) ‘Wie sich Ethnisierungs- und Kriminalisierungsprozesse in Biographien von allochthonen Jugendlichen verknüpfen. Eine sozialkonstruktivistische Analyse’; (2011) (with B. Pusch) *Migration und Türkei: Neue Migrationsbewegungen am Rande der Europäischen Union*, Ergon Verlag; (2011) ‘University-community partnership in working with street children: accounts given by students’, *Maltepe University Journal*, 134ff; (2013) ‘Effects of the Erasmus Programme on Turkish Universities and University Students’, *Trakya University Journal of Social Science*, 15(1), 109–22; (2012), ‘The Social Aspect in the Juvenile Justice System’, in International Justice for Children Symposium, (eds), Opening Speeches and Plenary Sessions, 21–4. Available online at www.unicef.org.tr/files/bilgimerkezi/doc/Openning%20Speeches_eng.pdf, [Accessed 10 January 2016].

**Irmgard Vogt**, PhD, is Professor and Senior Researcher of the Institute of Addiction Research Frankfurt, University of Applied Sciences Frankfurt am Main, Germany. She was Full Professor at the Department of Health and Social Work of UAS Frankfurt from 1992 to 2009, and has been Adjoint Professor since 1983 at the Department of Sociology of Goethe-University Frankfurt. Her major research focuses are mental health, addiction research and gender, addiction policies and health psychology. Some selected publications are: (2015) (with J. Fritz and N. Kuplewatzky) *Frauen, Sucht und Gewalt: Chancen und Risiken bei der Suche nach Hilfen und Veränderungen*, gFFZ Online-Publikation; (2012) (with M. Schmid and M. Schu) *Motivational Case Management*, Heidelberg, Medhochzwei-Verlag; (2011) *Auch Süchtige altern*, Frankfurt, Fachhochschulverlag; (1989) (with S. Scheerer) *Drogen und Drogenpolitik*, Frankfurt, Campus.

**John Watson** is Lecturer in Social Work and Disabled Students Advisor at the University of Hull. His research focuses on substance misuse policy and interventions, and communication and counselling skills. His main publications include: (2014) ‘Alcohol and other drug treatment’, in B. Teater, (ed.) *Contemporary Social Work Practice: A Handbook for Students*, Maidenhead: Open University Press; (2012) ‘The good, the bad and the vague: Assessing emerging Conservative drug policy’, *Critical Social Policy*; (2011) ‘Resistance is Futile? Exploring the potential of motivational interviewing’, *Journal of Social Work Practice*, 25(4), 465–79; (forthcoming) (with N. Stanley, B. Fell, P. Miller, and G. Thomson) ‘Men’s Talk: Men’s Understandings of Violence Against Women and Motivations for Change’, *Violence Against Women*; (2009) (with N. Stanley, B. Fell, P. Miller and G. Thomson) *Men’s Talk:*
*Research to inform Hull's social marketing initiative on domestic violence*,
Preston: University of Central Lancashire.

**Xiaoxiao Xie** is a PhD candidate at the Department of Asian Studies of the University of Adelaide, Australia. Before starting his PhD in Adelaide in 2011, he studied history at Shanghai University. His research interests revolve around the New Left, globalisation theory, sociology (archaeology) of knowledge, social work theory, and Shanghai studies. Selected publications include: (2015) 'Roland Robertson's Theory of Globalization' (in Chinese) in *Global Studies Review* Volume Two, ChangGang Guo, (ed.), Commercial Press.

**Ziqian Xu** is a MSW student at the Department of Social Work of Shanghai University. Her research interest is focused on health care social work. She is co-author (with F. Yang and K.F. Li) of the following publication: 'A Qualitative Insight into the Psychosocial Adjustment to Cancer in Chinese Culture', North American Chinese Sociologists Association Annual Conference. Chicago, USA. August, 2015.

**Fang Yang**, Dr, is Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Work of Shanghai University. Her research interests focus on health care social work, social gerontology, health psychology. Her main publications include: (2015) (with J.E. Ramsay, O.C. Schultheiss, and J.S. Pang) 'Implicit achievement motivation moderates the effect of motive-relevant challenge on salivary cortisol', *Motivation and Emotion*, 39(3), 321-34; (2015) (with C.T. Salmon, J.S. Pang, and W.J.Y. Cheng) 'Media exposure and smoking intention in adolescents: a moderated mediation analysis from a cultivation perspective', *Journal of Health Psychology*, 20(2), 188-97; (2014) (with K.A. Tan and W.J.Y. Cheng) 'The effects of connectedness on health-promoting and health-compromising behaviors in adolescents: evidence from a statewide survey', *Journal of Primary Prevention*, 35(1), 33-46; (2013) (with W.J.Y. Cheng, R.M.H. Ho, and K. Pooh) 'Psychosocial correlates of cigarette smoking among Asian American and Pacific Islander adolescents', *Addictive Behaviors*, 38(4), 1890-3.

**Ute Zillig** completed her Diploma in Social Sciences and Social Work and is currently working at Frauen-Notruf e.V. Göttingen, a women's counselling centre on sexual and domestic violence as well as at the Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences. In both positions she offers trauma-informed counselling for women and children (intimate partner violence and sexual abuse) and gives lectures and training on trauma-informed social work and counselling. Her research interests are focused on consequences of gender-based violence, trauma-related counselling/social work, and transgenerational consequences of traumata.
# Preface

Ursula Kämmerer-Rütten, Alexandra Schleyer-Lindenmann, Beatrix Schwarzer and Yafang Wang

The idea for this book evolved from an International Summer School Programme at Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences, where social work professionals and academics from different countries worked together on themes relating to ‘Human Rights and Social Justice’. As soon as we started working together we saw that we shared professional interests in relation to common social problems. Furthermore, we observed that transnational contexts constitute a rising matter of concern in many countries and that each country proposed its own ways of coping with it. We took the opportunity to start a dialogue about theoretical approaches and strategies for practice. Using case study examples as starting points we worked on the potential needs of social workers:

* shared competencies, for example (inter)cultural awareness;

* professionalisation or continuous training to cope with national and international social challenges;

* social policies and legislation in a rapidly changing world.

We saw that a growing number of people lead ‘transnational lives’, i.e. lives that transcend national boundaries and that these individuals or families – usually labelled as migrants, refugees, asylum-seekers – are often traumatised, exploited and vulnerable and in need of psycho-social support. Also their competencies, such as language skills and social networks across national borders, are often ignored by social workers as a resource for potential empowerment.

We also saw that there are often tensions between social workers and their own employers, which may be the State itself or often state-supported institutions. In some countries, the welfare state has entered a period of re-organisation and economisation by rolling back its boundaries and thus, social workers may find themselves trapped in narrow legal and financial frameworks influencing their working conditions as well as the range of support available to people in need. In other countries, the welfare state is not (yet) developed but statutory control is powerful and influences social work practice substantially. In all cases, the role of social work professionals is strongly affected and needs to be critically assessed as well as strengthened. Therefore, we strongly believe that it is important for social workers all over the world to engage in professional networking and
dialogue across countries and furthermore, to participate in professional associations, in order to be heard and to exercise power and influence, not only in the best interest of their clients but also to promote the process of professionalisation.

We saw that the relationship between social workers and the people seeking advice is strongly influenced by national frameworks that affect professional social work. This may become evident through the conflicting priorities of help and control (the double mandate) and the numerous aspects that shape the relationship between professionals and the recipients of support, such as professional education/qualification, social support policies or legal claims.

The discourse emerging from our summer schools prompted our decision to collect and share professional experiences and perspectives and write a book on transnational topics in social work practice.

‘Transnational Social Work’ (TSW) has gained increasing importance in social work theory and practice in recent years. Although the term transnationalism can be traced back to the beginning of the twentieth century, the debate surrounding transnationalism as a (positively connected) concept has gained more recognition through the influence of global developments such as migration (Hytten and Bettez 2011; Ife 2012).

Midgley (2001) was one of the first scholars to talk about transnational social work, highlighting the importance of globalisation and regionalism for social work practice. Transnational issues in relation to social work practice were taken further by other scholars, including Nalini Junko Negi and Rich Furman (Furman et al. 2010) who explored psychosocial, economic, environmental and political aspects that affect vulnerable individuals/groups and recommended the incorporation of transnational social work into the curriculum of social workers. Gray and Hetherington (2013) in particular took environmental issues as the starting point for transnational analyses and examined the impact of aspects such as climate change, natural disasters, sustainability or environmental justice on social work practice.

The underlying – and often not revealed – frame of social work is the nation state. Social policy is mainly based on political structures and decisions and played out in institutions/organisations in a designed geographical environment. The nation is often seen as a container (Pries 2011; Reutlinger 2011; Herz and Olivier 2013) – there is a defined inside and outside. Inside this container, welfare strategies and social policies are taking place. Outside the container there are other containers interacting (as mainly covered by international social work). Globalisation and migration increasingly challenge this idea of a clearly defined space for social work (Giebeler 2002; Faist 2011; Soysal 2011; Faist 2014), and new developments are raising questions about identification, identity, social networks and social pressure (e.g. remittances). The book focuses therefore mainly on two developments:

* Individuals and groups who regularly cross the borders of the nation state (physically or virtually). These crossings influence their life and their social networks as well as strategies for survival and decision making (e.g. refugees).
* Ideologies and challenges such as poverty, equity, environment, and human rights travelling across national borders and influencing social policies, social work practices and strategies.

Transnational social work challenges the idea of the nation state as a given entity and argues that globalisation and the new media, as well as an increasing number of people crossing borders, must inevitably have an impact on the theories and strategies of social work (Furman et al. 2008; Dahinden 2011). Transnational social work indeed criticises social work for its restricted focus on a geographically defined space (Kniffki 2011; Lightman 2012). This restriction influences work with clients including not recognising competencies such as language knowledge and survival strategies as well as social networks outside the nation state (Leiprecht and Vogel 2008).

However, what constitutes TSW needs further discussion and a deepening not only of its theoretical base but also of its practical outcomes based on the exchange of ideas and practices. We are currently witnessing that the nature of the nation state is rapidly changing and people's lives are less bound to traditional structures and institutions – instead they are more and more controlled by global movements and processes emerging from economic, technological, cultural and/or religious influences. This – we assert – requires a (professional) dialogue across boundaries and across countries and one of the aims of this book is to contribute to this dialogue.

Social work is increasingly being labelled as a ‘human rights profession’ (Foucault 1977; Hunt 2007; Staub-Bernasconi 2007) and we trust that a continuing transnational dialogue is a valuable contribution to the further recognition of human rights as a fundamentally transnational issue affecting and also addressing social work as a human rights profession.

Theoretical and practical knowledge is needed in order to reflect on the potential and the limitations of social work in general and of transnational social work in particular. Transnational social work practices – as part of social work in general – are embedded in the possibilities as well as the restrictions of national contexts, since these contexts function as the framework for professional interventions in social work practice.

In order to provide important theoretical components on TSW as well as practical examples from different countries, this book is structured in three parts:

* Theoretical Perspectives

* Country Profiles

* Case Studies.

The profiles and case studies survey examples from eight countries. A brief outline of all three parts is given below, while more detail is provided at the beginning of each section.

*Part I* comprises chapters which characterise and frame transnational social work from different *theoretical perspectives* including: first, an approach to define transnational social work for the present context; second, an overview of international
professional activities, structures and dynamics and the impact of indigenous theories; third, a comparison between influential Western theories and some indigenous Indian approaches; and fourth, a focus on social work as a Human Rights profession based on a critical discussion of the concept of Human Rights itself.

*Part II* includes *country profiles* of all countries included in this book: China, France, Germany, Great Britain, India, Israel, Malaysia, and Turkey. This selection is determined by the Frankfurt Summer School Programme and its participating countries. The country profiles provide basic information on the respective national welfare systems as well as on the current and evolving role of professional social work. The country profiles aim to offer a better understanding of the opportunities that social work professionals encounter in their everyday work, but also the challenges they face. Each country profile can also be used to obtain a basic understanding of the case studies as well as the comments provided in Part III.

*Part III* is composed of eight *case studies* concerning transnational social work embedded in a national context as well as two comments from other national contexts in relation to each case study. The case studies take the reader 'into the field' of social work in the respective national setting, by analysing specific situations or cases and highlighting national social work practice. Each chapter concentrates on a specific transnational 'case' and the involvement of social work professionals. To encourage the transnational dialogue, these case studies are taken as a starting point by colleagues from other countries for commentary and to answer the following question:

How would social work in the national context of the respective commentator deal with this specific case?

It is hoped that this book, with its multilevel theoretical and applied approach, offers a useful contribution to the development of the emerging field of transnational social work. This book provides information and reflections on transnational social work for students and professionals of social work, but also for readers from other disciplines, e.g. politics, sociology, psychology, law. Particularly, through the present book, we hope to

* raise awareness of relevant issues in social work theory and practice from a transnational perspective and develop sensitivity for a transnational approach in social work;

* provide practice-oriented case study materials from different national/cultural backgrounds;

* highlight similarities and differences in dealing with specific cases and trigger questions about the situation in one's own country and the professional field;

* stimulate discussions on further development of transnational social work both in theory and in practice;

* foster a dialogue approach across nation states.

We argue that the dialogue principle across nations and cultures – especially reflected in our approach to include case studies and comments – may be a fruitful way to foster transparency, equality and mutual understanding.
We recognise that we are living in a post-colonial global society and that there
is an increasing need to enforce and strengthen the development of transnational
standards of citizenship and rights – and this also applies to professional
involvement and transnational expertise for social work professionals worldwide.

This is what this book tries to accomplish, mainly as an ‘Eastern–Western
Dialogue’, in the form of contributions from Asia and Europe. That we are missing
the perspectives and experiences of countries from the African, Australian and
American continents is a great regret for us. However, we fully expect that the
dialogue will continue, and grow to embrace more countries and other continents.

Frankfurt a. Main/Marseille/Shanghai, February 2016

The Editors

References

Dahinden, J., 2011. 'Wer entwickelt einen transnationalen Habitus? Ungleiche Transnationalisierungsprozesse als Ausdruck ungleicher Ressourcenverteilung', in C. Reutlinger, J. Kniffki, and N. Baghdadi, eds, *Die soziale Welt quer denken. Transnationalisierung und ihre Folgen für die soziale Arbeit*. Berlin: Frank & Timme, 83–107.

Faist, T., 2011. 'Transnationalism. Migrant Incorporation beyond Methodological Nationalism', in Heinrich Böll Stiftung, ed., *Transnationalismus & Migration. Dossier*, 25-33.

Faist, T., 2014. "‘We are all Transnationals now”. The Relevance of Transnationality for Understanding Social Inequalities”, *SFB 882 Working Paper Series* (25), 1–25 [Accessed 14 April 2014].

Foucault, M., 1977. *Discipline and punish. The birth of the prison*. London, New York: Penguin Books.

Furman, R., Negi, N.J., Schatz, M.C.S., Jones, S., 2008. 'Transnational Social Work. Using a wraparound model', *Global Networks* 8(4): 496–503.

Furman, R., Negi, N.J., and Salvador, R., 2010. 'An Introduction to Transnational Social Work', in N.J. Negi and R. Furman, eds, *Transnational Social Work Practice*. New York: Columbia University Press, 3–19.

Giebeler, C., 2002. "‘Global Social Work – Interkulturelle Soziale Arbeit”. Globale und interkulturelle Kompetenz in der Sozialarbeitswissenschaft”, *ZEP: Zeitschrift für internationale Bildungsforschung und Entwicklungspädagogik* 25(2): 27–30.

Gray, M. and Hetherington, T., 2013. ‘Indigenization, indigenous social work and decolonization: Mapping the theoretical terrain’, in M. Gray, J. Coates, M. Yellow Bird, T. Hetherington, eds, *Decolonizing social work*. Burlington: Ashgate Pub. Company (Contemporary social work studies), 25–41.

Herz, A., and Olivier, C., 2013. 'Das Transmigrantische der Sozialen Arbeit. Thematischer Aufriss einer spannungsreichen Suchbewegung', in A. Herz and C. Olivier, eds, *Transmigration und Soziale Arbeit. Ein öffnender Blick auf Alltagswelten*. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Hohengehren, 1–18.

Hunt, L.A., 2007. *Inventing human rights. A history*. Princeton, N.J: Recording for the Blind & Dyslexic.

Hytten, K., and Bettez, S.C., 2011. *Understanding Education for Social Justice* [online]. Available from: www.stjohns.edu/sites/default/files/documents/adminoffices/asl-understanding-education-social-justice.pdf [Accessed 1 February 2016].
Ife, J., 2012. *Human Rights and Social Work*. Cambridge University Press Textbooks.

Kniffki, J., 2011. 'Lokale Folgewirkungen transnationaler Prozesse', in C. Reutlinger, J. Kniffki, and N. Baghdadi, eds, *Die soziale Welt quer denken. Transnationalisierung und ihre Folgen für die soziale Arbeit*. Berlin: Frank & Timme, 63–80.

Leiprecht, R., and Vogel, D., 2008. 'Transkulturalität und Transnationalität als Herausforderung für die Gestaltung Sozialer Arbeit und sozialer Dienste vor Ort', in H.G. Homfeldt, W. Schröer, and C. Schweppe, eds, *Soziale Arbeit und Transnationalität. Herausforderungen eines spannungsreichen Bezugs*. Weinheim, München: Juventa-Verl, 25–44.

Lightman, E., 2012. 'Transnational Social Policy and Migration', in A.S. Chambon, W. Schröer, and C. Schweppe, eds, *Transnational Social Support*. New York: Routledge, 13–29.

Midgley, J., 2001. 'Issues in International Social Work. Resolving Critical Debates in the Profession', *Journal of Social Work* 1(1): 21–35 [Accessed 14 April 2014].

Pries, L., 2011. 'Transnationalisierung der sozialen Welt als Herausforderung und Chance', in C. Reutlinger, J. Kniffki, and N. Baghdadi, eds, *Die soziale Welt quer denken. Transnationalisierung und ihre Folgen für die soziale Arbeit*. Berlin: Frank & Timme, 17–36.

Reutlinger, C., 2011. 'Transnationale Sozialräume. Zur (neuen) Bedeutung von Ort und Raum in der Sozialen Arbeit', in C. Reutlinger, J. Kniffki, and N. Baghdadi, eds, *Die soziale Welt quer denken. Transnationalisierung und ihre Folgen für die soziale Arbeit*. Berlin: Frank & Timme, 37–62.

Soysal, Y.N., 2011. 'Postnational Citizenship. Rights and Obligations of Individuality', in Heinrich Böll Stiftung, ed., *Transnationalismus & Migration. Dossier*, 73–7.

Staub-Bernasconi, S., 2007. 'Soziale Arbeit: Dienstleistung oder Menschenrechtsprofession? Zum Selbstverständnis Sozialer Arbeit in Deutschland mit einem Seitenblick auf die internationale Diskussionslandschaft', in A. Lob-Hüdepohl and W. Lesch, eds, *Ethik Sozialer Arbeit. Ein Handbuch*. Paderborn: Schöningh; UTB, 20–54.
Acknowledgements

This truly transnational project was created, developed, nurtured, and edited in a
continuous dialogue starting in 2013 and being made public today. It would not be
successful without the opportunities for personal meetings which opened the
space for academic arguments and exchange, cultural (mis)understandings and
intercultural communication, as well as debates about different knowledge and
approaches. Therefore, we would like to thank the German Academic Exchange
Service (DAAD) and the European ERASMUS+ Programme for their funding to
provide such spaces during the Summer Programmes.

As editors, we wish to express our deepest gratitude to all the people who have
collaborated in the process of developing this book.

First, we wish to thank our chapter authors from around the world, who have
been willing to contribute with their experience, expertise and knowledge. We
thank them especially for their patience as they responded to our repeated, and
numerous editorial comments, questions and suggestions, and appreciate their
understanding of the deadlines and limitations.

In addition, we would like to thank a number of people for their specific
contribution which made publication possible: Dagmar Oberlies for the initial
idea of the book and Rachel Wareham for language editing.

We also thank Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences for their financial support
and the team at Taylor and Francis for welcoming our concept and encouraging us
to write this book. Their support was invaluable and most appreciated.

Finally, our gratitude goes to everyone in our professional and personal
networks who supported and encouraged us tirelessly along the journey to realise
this project.

Frankfurt a. Main/Marseille/Shanghai, February 2016

The Editors
# A note on terminology and comparisons

Ursula Kämmerer-Rütten, Alexandra Schleyer-Lindenmann, Beatrix Schwarzer and Yafang Wang

Editing a book on transnational social work including authors from various countries is a challenge in many ways – terminology, alone, is a very tricky matter.

This already starts with social work. In this book we adhere to the terms ‘social work’ and ‘social workers’, but these terms can have different meanings in different countries, making comparisons difficult. However, whilst this variability makes formal comparisons problematic, it is useful as an aid to reflection and can offer insights into different ways of understanding and constructing the social work task, and social work professions (Meeuwisse and Swärd 2007: 491). Professional social work in one country may have different historical, political and educational foundations compared to another country, but we have asked our authors to provide this information so that the foundations and frameworks become as transparent as possible. Comparison may also appear difficult concerning professional autonomy: while in some countries social workers represent the authorities and the political system more directly and are perhaps less independent, in others social workers appear to be more autonomous concerning their professional interventions as well as their participation in policy development and decision-making. However, according to our dialogue principle we suggest abstaining from simple comparisons and categorisations and instead encourage mutual understanding in the light of diverse and distinct national and professional characteristics.

Another important issue is the terminology we use concerning the recipients of social work. What do we call the people seeking help and/or advice? We do not want to ask our authors to use a standardised term to describe the relationship between those who assess and commission services and those who are the recipients of these services. Therefore, throughout the book a variety of terms appear, and while many authors talk about clients or service users, others refer to people in need or in need of support. We are aware that different labels conjure up differing identities and suggest differing relationships and differing power dynamics – as has been pointed out by McLaughlin (2009) – but the terminology used is the professional and political choice of each individual author emerging from their particular national and professional contexts.

Globalisation is a complex idea and the authors in this book refer to it in many contexts: as a global discourse concerning human rights policies and social justice, as an economic strategy (free trade, open market), as a compression of time and
place (fast mobility of individuals/news/goods) etc. In many articles globalisation
refers to something awkward, something difficult to influence, something people
are exposed to. However, for our purpose, we step back from negative connotations
and instead perceive globalisation as the emergence of a global awareness
respecting diversity but uniting people by this shared feeling and identity (Ahmadi
2003; van Ewijk 2009: 11).

References

Ahmadi, N., 2003. 'Globalisation of consciousness and new challenges for international social work', *International Journal of Social Welfare* 12: 14–23. Available from: http://ehs.siu.edu/socialwork/_common/documents/articles/ahmadi.pdf [Accessed 16 May 2016].

McLaughlin, H., 2009. 'Editor's Choice: What's in a name: "Client", "Patient", "Customer", "Consumer", "Expert by Experience", "Service User" – What's next?' *British Journal of Social Work* 39(6): 1101–17.

Meeuwisse, A., and Swärd, Hans, 2007. ‘Cross-national comparisons of social work – a question of initial assumptions and levels of analysis’, *European Journal of Social Work* 10(4): 481–96.

van Ewijk, H., 2009. 'Citizenship-based social work', *International Social Work* 52(2): 167–79.
Abbreviations

<table><tr><td>AFRUCA</td><td>Africans Unite against Child Abuse</td></tr><tr><td>AIDS</td><td>Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome</td></tr><tr><td>AMHP</td><td>Approved Mental Health Professionals</td></tr><tr><td>ANESEM</td><td>Agence nationale de l'évaluation et de la qualité d'accueil des établissements et services sociaux et médico-sociaux</td></tr><tr><td>ARKH</td><td>Asylum Seekers &amp; Refugees of Kingston upon Hull</td></tr><tr><td>ASSWI</td><td>Association of Schools of Social Work in India</td></tr><tr><td>ASYE</td><td>Assessed and Supported Year in Employment</td></tr><tr><td>BA</td><td>Bachelor of Arts</td></tr><tr><td>BASW</td><td>British Association of Social Workers</td></tr><tr><td>BCE</td><td>Before the Common Era (Equivalent to BC, Before Christ)</td></tr><tr><td>BME</td><td>Black and Minority Ethnic People</td></tr><tr><td>CADA</td><td>Centre d'accueil pour les demandeurs d'asile – Reception centre for asylum seekers</td></tr><tr><td>CAMHS</td><td>Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service</td></tr><tr><td>CBO</td><td>Community Based Organisation</td></tr><tr><td>CBS</td><td>Central Bureau of Statistics</td></tr><tr><td>CEAS</td><td>Common European Asylum System</td></tr><tr><td>CEDAW</td><td>Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women</td></tr><tr><td>CESEDA</td><td>Code de l'entrée et du séjour des étrangers et du droit d'asile / code concerning the entry and stay of foreigners and asylum rights</td></tr><tr><td>CNDA</td><td>Cour nationale du droit d'asile / National court for the right to asylum</td></tr><tr><td>CPA</td><td>Central Plan Assistance</td></tr><tr><td>CRC</td><td>Convention on the Rights of the Child</td></tr><tr><td>CRPD</td><td>Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities</td></tr><tr><td>CV</td><td>Curriculum Vitae</td></tr><tr><td>DBH</td><td>Fachverband für soziale Arbeit, Strafrecht und Kriminalpolitik</td></tr><tr><td>DBSH</td><td>Deutscher Berufsverband für soziale Arbeit und Heilberufe</td></tr><tr><td>DGSA</td><td>Deutsche Gesellschaft für soziale Arbeit</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>DMW</td><td>Domestic Migrant Workers</td></tr><tr><td>DoH</td><td>Department of Health</td></tr><tr><td>DREES</td><td>Direction de la recherche, des études, de l'évaluation et des statistiques</td></tr><tr><td>e.V.</td><td>eingetragener Verein (= registered association)</td></tr><tr><td>ECTS</td><td>European Credit Transfer System</td></tr><tr><td>EU</td><td>European Union</td></tr><tr><td>FNARS</td><td>Fédération nationale des associations d'accueil et de réinsertion sociale</td></tr><tr><td>GDP</td><td>Gross Domestic Product</td></tr><tr><td>GOI</td><td>Government of India</td></tr><tr><td>HAT</td><td>Heroin Assisted Therapy</td></tr><tr><td>HCPC</td><td>Health and Care Professions Council</td></tr><tr><td>HIV</td><td>Human Immunodeficiency Virus</td></tr><tr><td>HRLN</td><td>Human Rights and Law Network</td></tr><tr><td>HUDA</td><td>Hébergement d'urgence dédié aux demandeurs d'asile / emergency accommodation for asylum seekers</td></tr><tr><td>Hukou</td><td>Household Registration System</td></tr><tr><td>IASSW</td><td>International Association of Schools of Social Work</td></tr><tr><td>ICERD</td><td>International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination</td></tr><tr><td>ICMR</td><td>Indian Council of Medical Research</td></tr><tr><td>ICPS</td><td>Interpersonal Cognitive Problem Solving</td></tr><tr><td>ICRPD</td><td>International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities</td></tr><tr><td>ICSW</td><td>International Council of Social Welfare</td></tr><tr><td>ICU</td><td>Intensive Care Units</td></tr><tr><td>IEP</td><td>Institute of Economics and Peace</td></tr><tr><td>IFSW</td><td>International Federation of Social Workers</td></tr><tr><td>ILO</td><td>International Labour Organisation</td></tr><tr><td>INSEE</td><td>Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques</td></tr><tr><td>IOM</td><td>International Organization for Migration</td></tr><tr><td>ISA</td><td>Informationssystem Studienwahl und Arbeitsmarkt</td></tr><tr><td>ISW</td><td>International Social Work</td></tr><tr><td>IT</td><td>Information Technology</td></tr><tr><td>ITC</td><td>Israel Trauma Coalition</td></tr><tr><td>KPSS</td><td>Kamu Personel Secme Sinavi</td></tr><tr><td>LGBT</td><td>Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender</td></tr><tr><td>LOI</td><td>Letter of Intent</td></tr><tr><td>MAA</td><td>Malaysian Association of Almoners</td></tr><tr><td>MAMSW</td><td>Malaysian Association of Medical Social Workers</td></tr><tr><td>MASW</td><td>Malaysian Association of Social Workers</td></tr><tr><td>MDG</td><td>Millenium Development Goals</td></tr><tr><td>MIND</td><td>Mental health charity organisation</td></tr><tr><td>MMT</td><td>Methadone Maintenance Therapy</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>MoU</td><td>Memorandum of Understanding</td></tr><tr><td>NABARD</td><td>National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development</td></tr><tr><td>NGO</td><td>Non-Governmental Organization</td></tr><tr><td>OBC</td><td>Other Backward Classes</td></tr><tr><td>OECD</td><td>Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development</td></tr><tr><td>OFII</td><td>Office Français d'immigration et d'intégration / French office for immigration and integration</td></tr><tr><td>OFPRA</td><td>Office Français de protections des réfugiés et apatrides / French office for refugees and stateless persons</td></tr><tr><td>OHCHR</td><td>Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights</td></tr><tr><td>ONPES</td><td>Observatoire National de la Pauvreté et de l'exclusion sociale</td></tr><tr><td>PCF</td><td>Professional Capabilities Framework</td></tr><tr><td>PTSD</td><td>Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder</td></tr><tr><td>REM</td><td>Réseau européen des migrations</td></tr><tr><td>RHA</td><td>Regional Health Agencies</td></tr><tr><td>RMB</td><td>Renminbi (Chinese Currency)</td></tr><tr><td>SC</td><td>Scheduled Castes</td></tr><tr><td>SHCEK</td><td>Sosyal Hizmetler Kocuk Ezirgeme Kurumu (Social Services and Child Protection Agency)</td></tr><tr><td>SHUD</td><td>Sosyal Hizmet Uzmanları Dernegi (Turkish Association of Social Workers)</td></tr><tr><td>SSW</td><td>School Social Workers</td></tr><tr><td>ST</td><td>Scheduled Tribes</td></tr><tr><td>SWE</td><td>Social Work Education</td></tr><tr><td>TCSW</td><td>The College of Social Work</td></tr><tr><td>TEPAV</td><td>Turkiye Ekonomi Politikaları Arastirma Vakfi</td></tr><tr><td>TIP</td><td>Trafficking in Persons</td></tr><tr><td>TISS</td><td>Tata Institute of Social Sciences</td></tr><tr><td>TSW</td><td>Transnational Social Work</td></tr><tr><td>TUIK</td><td>Türkiye Istatistic Kurumu (Turkish Statistical Institute)</td></tr><tr><td>UDHR</td><td>Universal Declaration of Human Rights</td></tr><tr><td>UGC</td><td>University Grants Commission</td></tr><tr><td>UK</td><td>United Kingdom</td></tr><tr><td>UN</td><td>United Nations</td></tr><tr><td>UN Convention</td><td>United Nations Convention</td></tr><tr><td>UNHCR</td><td>United Nations High Commission for Refugees</td></tr><tr><td>UNICEF</td><td>United Nations Children's Fund</td></tr><tr><td>UNODC</td><td>United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime</td></tr><tr><td>USA</td><td>United States of America</td></tr><tr><td>USD</td><td>US Dollar</td></tr><tr><td>WAO</td><td>Womens Aid Organisation</td></tr><tr><td>WHO</td><td>World Health Organization</td></tr><tr><td>YOK</td><td>Yükseköğretim Kurulu (Council for Higher Education)</td></tr></table>
This page intentionally left blank
# Part I

## Theoretical Perspectives

Ursula Kämmerer-Rütten, Alexandra Schleyer-Lindenmann, Beatrix Schwarzer and Yafang Wang

### Introduction

Part I of this book concentrates on theoretical discourses concerning professional social work in international and transnational contexts. While international developments and dialogue regarding professional social work have largely been confined to academic exchanges, worldwide social work practice is based on, and often confronted primarily with, local, regional and national developments. Only more recently are professionals becoming involved in transnational issues as they deal with problems caused by global inter-dependencies, international conflicts and transnational movements/migrations.

Since its birth in the last third of the nineteenth century social work has become a global profession practised in more than 144 countries (IASSW 2012). Its spread and development have been accompanied by a drive to attain professional status (Weiss-Gal and Welbourne 2008) and international activities and engagement have led to an ever growing professional community networking globally and crossing boundaries and areas of practice.

In 2003 Ahmadi observed that:

> International migration makes poverty, political and religious oppressions, and the lack of civil rights in one society the concern of other societies. Woman trafficking and sex tourism make the sexual exploitation of women and children in one part of the world the moral, legal and public health concern of other parts. Low wages, harsh work conditions and the exploitation of an underage work force in one country affect national employment policies and labour markets in other countries.

(Ahmadi 2003: 15)

These examples offer striking proof that the transnational perspective is becoming more and more integral to social work professions both in theory and practice. It is therefore important to address issues of human rights and social justice from a transnational perspective and provide insight into specific areas of transnational social work to foster shared understanding and collective responsibility.

Against a background of globalisation, rising social problems can originate from one nation or from a set of nations, but have regional and continental
effects. In 2015, the movement of people inside and across national borders reached its highest level since the beginning of records on this issue (UNHCR). This has led to the need to reformulate national social policies and practice as well as representing a further challenge to social work strategies. In addition this has led to the emergence of Transnational Social Work (TSW) as a new concept which gained recognition in the field of social work around the turn of the twenty-first century.

Levitt and Glick Schiller define transnational processes as follows: ‘The term transnationalism or transnational processes emphasize [sic] the ongoing interconnecting or flow of people, ideas, objects or capital across border [sic] of nation-states’ (Levitt and Glick Schiller 2004: 5).

But is crossing a border a necessary condition to label a social issue transnational and are all cross-border movements automatically a concern for social work?

Beatrix Schwarzer stipulates that transnational exchanges of people, ideas and goods are not always related to social work. Not all migrants are potential clients and not all transnational political decisions are suitable for support by social work as a human rights profession. The transnational perspective, for Schwarzer, is not restricted to the social work fields directly confronted with migrants or intercultural exchange but rather, challenges social work as a discipline and profession as such. Social work is primarily based on unmarked national identity and stereotypes, which can function as an underlying force in the construction of ‘Otherness’.

The terms ‘international social work’ and ‘transnational social work’ are often confused. However, they do not share the same meaning and origin. International social work has a longer history – emerging initially in the global north – and serves as a foundation for exchange between social workers from different countries. In her chapter, Ute Straub starts by giving an account of international professional activities and relevant networks and organisations and their objectives. She then widens the picture of largely Western-based concepts produced by the global north and questions the ‘Westernness’ by confronting it with indigenous approaches from the global south.

The integration of Western and indigenous approaches is also highlighted by Arvind Agrawal’s contribution. He reviews theoretical developments in social work by focusing on Western theoretical approaches and contrasting them with Indian philosophy. After recalling relevant classical approaches including social capital theory, empowerment theory as well as the capability approach, the author reflects upon classical Indian theories such as Jainism, the Bishnois Sect’s philosophy and Gandhian ideas, and he argues the need for an integrated theoretical paradigm for transnational social work.

Finally, Dagmar Oberlies considers transnational social work within the framework of social work as a human rights profession. She points out that human rights are embedded in global political processes. This formulation of human rights is challenged by religious, regional, ideological and ethical perspectives. At the same time human rights function as a global ethical framework for social work. This leads to tensions mirrored in contrasts such as individualism versus collectivism-based approaches or rights-based versus culturally sensitive perspectives.
References

Ahmadi, N., 2003. 'Globalisation of consciousness and new challenges for international social work', *International Journal of Social Welfare* 12: 14–23. Available from: http://ehs.siu.edu/socialwork/_common/documents/articles/ahmadi.pdf [Accessed 15 April 2016].

IASSW, 2012. *Directory of Social Work Schools/Programs* [online]. International Association of Schools of Social Work. Available from: www.iassw-aiets.org/uploads/file/20121025_IASSW-Directory-October-2012.pdf [Accessed 14 December 2015].

Levitt, P., and Glick Schiller, N., 2004. ‘Conceptualizing Simultaneity. A Transnational Social Field Perspective on Society’, *International Migration Review* 38(145): 595–629.

UNHCR. *The refugee story in data and statistics* [online]. UN Refugee Agency. Available from: www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646c4d6.html [Accessed 10 January 2016].

Weiss-Gal, I., and Welbourne, P., 2008. 'The professionalisation of social work. A cross-national exploration', *International Journal of Social Welfare* 17(4): 281–90.
# 1 Transnational social work

## An introduction

*Beatrix Schwarzer*

‘The world is getting smaller’ is a phrase most people agree on. Virtual social networks offer the possibility of being a part of events happening thousands of miles away from where they take place. The so-called Arab Spring is just one example. Knowledge can travel fast and information can be accessed through the Internet in no time. Literally more and more people cross national borders – often more than once – to live elsewhere. Reasons can be manifold, such as holidays, seeking work or refuge, moving closer to family members or friends, experiencing a different part of the world by voluntary work or studying, to mention but a few. The duration of the stay is variable, from merely a couple of days to an entire lifetime. Often national borders are crossed multiple times, and migration can no longer be seen as a one-off process of simply leaving a country and spending the rest of one’s life in another (Lightman 2012). However, out of these many diverse crossings, only a few are of concern to social work theory and practice.

Generally speaking, social work focuses on groups of people whose ‘global basic needs’ (Gil 2012: 20) are neglected or who are facing structural inequalities. Social work is connected to local and national structures such as law and social security on the one hand and is also responsible for individual people on the other.

The social work profession promotes social change, problem solving in human relationships and the empowerment and liberation of people to enhance well-being. Utilising theories of human behaviour and social systems, social work intervenes at the points where people interact with their environments. Principles of human rights and social justice are fundamental to social work.

(IFSW 2012).

Transnational social work (TSW) shares this basic foundation with social work in general but can also be understood as a critical perspective pointing to unseen, unmarked and unnoticed boundaries of Social Work (Levitt and Glick Schiller 2004; Lightman 2012). It is related to crossing and transcending national borders and is influenced by the diversity of migration and refugee processes. In this chapter, I will take a critical view on three issues TSW is concerned with: (1) the boundaries embedded in social work through the often unnoticed relation to the
nation state; (2) the part social work plays in questions of cultural norms and belonging; and (3) pointing to unmarked ground. Finally, the difficulties resulting from the wide variety of fields of social work will be explored – from supporting individual well-being to structural (in-)equalities. All these share a concern with the impact global and international developments have in social work.

TSW can open the spectrum of theoretical thinking in social work by taking
into account the context of hybrid formations of different national and cultural
backgrounds when working with individuals. Hybrid formations in the present
context are:

* The diverse cultural influences impacting on everyday life, such as questions of belonging and identity of the individual or group;

* The play of different cultures in forming specific social networks, including belonging to certain communities with similar life challenges;

* The tensions with social and cultural norms that can result in social isolation for individuals which might reduce possibilities for social participation and political involvement as well as difficulties claiming rights;

* The special needs of clients which might not be recognised and therefore taken seriously by social workers; clients not infrequently find support only outside the profession, like family, community or social networks, including those outside the nation state they live in.

Taking plural local connections seriously also means to focus on social, political and economic structures in and around social work. Generally speaking, TSW demands complex knowledge of thinking and working in the field. Social work practices as well as theoretical thinking have to be related to global processes and developments, whilst at the same time being embedded in local structures and contexts.

Critical perspectives on the nation state as a container

Social work struggles with the complexity of a wide spectrum of responsibilities ranging from individual needs to struggles against structural inequalities. Questions arise, such as: What are the boundaries of social work and what are its main aims and targets? Which boundaries should social work accept, and which need to be challenged? Should social work position itself in political debates or should it be neutral?

*On the international level, developments such as globalisation influence social interdependencies all around the world (Lyons and Huegler 2012; Faist 2011). International associations for social work (e.g. IASSW/ISSW/ICSW) have increasingly addressed important issues such as post-colonialism and globalisation over the last decades. These associations have highlighted that principles of human rights, social justice, collective responsibility and respect for diversities are global fundamentals basic to social work (Gray et al. 2010; Midgley 2001, 2010).*

The complex *relationship between the international and the national level* is
the focus of the Human Rights debate (Soysal 2011). Human Rights build the
framework for international social work, and therefore social work is often called ‘the Human Rights profession’ (Staub-Bernasconi 2012) and theories, strategies and practices are judged to these exacting standards. Conflicts arise when the global importance of human rights and social rights clash with restrictions such as supporting only people with a certain national citizenship. These conflicts are at play in everyday social work practice, they define the spectrum of issues that social work is concerned with, the finances of organisations and the access to basic rights like safety, housing, education and food (Gil 2012).

*On the national level*, the nation state is often seen as a container (Herz and Olivier 2013; Furman et al. 2008) – there is a defined inside and outside. Inside this container, welfare strategies and social policies are taking place and a common history is being constructed. Outside the container there are other containers. Human rights are meant to cut through this division but questions remain as to how that should be played out in everyday practices at a certain place in the world. This problem also arises in the education of social workers; social work professional education focuses mainly on the national context – often without naming these boundaries of knowledge and the resulting implications. This has been critiqued from different angles such as: (1) the rooting of human rights in a certain western thinking (see Oberlies, Chapter 4); (2) the implicit European and North American influences on the discipline; (3) the ignorance of indigenous approaches and theories (see Agrawal, Chapter 3); and (4) the ongoing demand to decolonise social work (Gray *et al.* 2013).

The container model suggests that the borders are solid and fixed and therefore are able to protect the inside.¹ Globalisation, migration, world trade, environmental changes, and wars not only cross these borders, but show the problems that arise when we think of them as fixed and impermeable. On the one hand there are manifold influences from economics and world trade, where borders are flexible or have little if no meaning at all. On the other hand, for refugees and migrants the borders, while contested, still seem as solid and meaningful as ever. This is especially true for borders around economically strong regions such as Europe and North America.

## Critical perspective on cultural norms and belonging

The container model also mirrors the idea of a national culture with implicit ideas about who belongs to that culture and who does not. TSW looks for answers to tackle the container concept as well as the effects this unmarked foundation has. It challenges the notion of ‘who belongs’ and focuses on the construction ‘who does not belong’ (Teater 2014: 78).

There are people who appear to ‘belong’ and fit well into the national container with its culture and traditions. But there are also people who do not belong. For example, people who are crossing a border to live elsewhere may be seen (and treated) differently from those who are not crossing. From the perspective of people who ‘belong’ to one national container, people who cross borders are often seen as ‘sitting between chairs’. This notion of an in-between is rooted in an idea
of two separate cultures uninfluenced by each other. People who migrate can be
seen as inhabiting a (conflicting) space which does not properly belong to either
of these cultures.

Questions of right and wrong – covering all areas of life, such as behaviour,
language, clothing, food etc. – are deeply embedded in societies. They result in
norms – mostly seen as normality – and also in differences – mostly seen as
deviations. Processes of ‘othering’ are taking place (Holliday et al. 2004: 21ff),
where the ‘other’ is different from the so-called ‘us’. This difference is embedded
in power structures and stigmatisations. The ‘other’ seems to have all the negative
characteristics and the ‘us’ does not include negative connotative features into
their self-perception. Usually the divide goes along binary terms such as modern–
traditional, emancipated–backwards, civilised–not civilised. The process of
‘othering’ always simultaneously exposes the construction of powerful, unmarked
norms. The differences function like a mirror, with the ‘us’ projecting negative
characteristics on to the ‘other’. The result of this process is a positive reflection
of the self for people in the position of power (Holliday et al. 2004: 30ff). But it
also keeps the power hierarchies intact.

On a structural level, social work is often at the forefront of dealing with processes of ‘othering’. Migrants and refugees as well as their descendants are seen as culturally different, even when they themselves do not claim that difference. This idea can often be found in social work concepts of intercultural competence and communication (Samovar et al. 2006). Social work therefore actively constructs (or acknowledges) this difference, often labelled as ‘ethnic’ or ‘cultural’. This is a basic part of the thinking of transnationalism as Nina Glick Schiller, Linda Basch and Cristina Szanton-Blanc showed in their groundbreaking article in 1992. ‘The hegemonic context imposes a discipline on newcomers who develop self-identifications, if not broader collective action, in accordance with categories and related behaviors that are not of their own making’ (Glick Schiller et al. 1992: 14).

There are, however, two sides to the coin. On the one side, social workers
acknowledge differences in the experiences of their clients and tackle inequalities
that migrants and refugees face. On the other hand, social workers also mainly still
hold to the idea of a national culture where migrants are in between two cultures
(Adelson 2001). Social work is embedded, it influences and actively participates in
disciplining and judging the notion and behaviours of the ‘others’, confronting
them with unmarked judgments – of the rights and wrongs of cultural norms. The
experience of migration is taken as a fundamental difference dividing people into
two groups – those with, and those without it. This seems to play a role in the
practices of social workers – even when not put forward explicitly by the clients.

TSW sees that migration and cross-border (family and friendship) networks are
important, and should be taken into account in social work practice, but it also
claims that cross-border experience cannot be taken as a general explanation for
individual attitudes. TSW criticises the notion of an in-between space between
two or more distinguishable national cultures. It challenges the underlying – often
stereotypical – thinking that there are people who belong and that there are
fundamentally different people like migrants and refugees. TSW acknowledges
differences in experiences and knowledge and even points to them as resources (e.g. language skills), whilst criticising the power hierarchies embedded in this separation. TSW thereby has a critical perspective on norms, and challenges the inequalities associated with them.

> People live in and create a new social and cultural space which calls for a new awareness of who they are, a new consciousness, and new identities. However, both the actors and analyst still look around them with visions shaped by the political boundaries of nation-states.

(Glick Schiller *et al.* 1992: 14)

Being embedded in cross-border social networks and/or being socialised in different national contexts also affects identity (Holliday *et al.* 2004: 6ff; Römhild 2004). Multiple influences continuously (re)form national culture(s) into something new and hybrid. Migrants, refugees and also descendants of migrants are affected by and affect cultural norms. They find their own symbiosis of local, regional and national identities (Römhild 2004) which may be labelled differently from – and not as part of – the national cultures they live in.

Social workers need to acknowledge that people with multiple cultural influences are not by themselves problematic or challenging, but come to regard these experiences and knowledge as resources, e.g. language skills, cross-border social networks and cultural competences. Accelerated through technology like social networks, mobile phones and affordable long-distance communication, the ties between families and friends all over the world can deepen. These ties have to be taken into account as a resource for social work practices (Duscha and Witte 2013). But migration also often brings special challenges – these cross-national ties can signify serious commitments, e.g. financial contributions and support to family members (IOM 2010; Furman *et al.* 2010).

## Critical perspective on pointing to unmarked foundations of social work

Like social work, TSW is interwoven into the nation state (Midgley 2001: 4). The difference between social work and TSW is the reflecting on these foundations and the potential in crossing, rather than accepting, boundaries. It is not the place where someone lives that defines their entitlement to receive (professional or social) support; the decisive criterion is citizenship (or at least a legal status in the country where someone is living) and this defines who has access and who does not (Owen 2011). As an example: social workers who work with refugees are caught between commitment to the client and the restriction of social services mainly reserved for citizens. Support is connected to legal status and provided by social work organisations. Access to jobs, food, education and accommodation is given through social workers and they have to act via the relevant national law (Hayes 2005: 185).

TSW indeed criticises social work for its restricted focus on a geographically defined space (Lightman 2012; Kniffki 2011). This restriction influences the work
with clients, including not recognising competences like language knowledge, survival strategies and social networks outside the nation state (Leiprecht and Vogel 2008).

TSW questions the restriction concerning the idea of a defined ‘inside’ and ‘outside’ (for example, social workers’ focus on citizens) by bringing into the spotlight topics such as inequality, poverty or demands for global justice as a reality connected to everyone’s everyday life. Global capitalism and trade as well as violent conflicts, both within and across nation states, influence the further consolidation of existing national and global hierarchies such as those between the global north and south, between poverty and wealth, between legal citizens and people without a legal status – and thus affect society at large.

TSW takes up the challenge to add a cross-national dimension. This creates the space to look at the following:

* Similar challenges in different contexts – what can we learn from each other?

* Local aspects of globalisation – how are global developments connected to local practices?

* Equality – what are the opportunities of a transnational perspective?

TSW points to the possibilities for social work theorists and practitioners to learn *from experience and thinking in other national contexts*. This exchange needs to start in someone's own context by knowing and critically reflecting on norms and national framing as well as in other contexts. Taking this into account opens the possibilities for transferring or translating strategies and knowledge as well as seeing the limits of this. Translation means a process of hearing, understanding and reflecting the possibility of applying knowledge to a new context. TSW sees itself as simultaneously embedded in local and national contexts whilst focusing on migration practices crossing them. Exchanges across borders create a social space, characterised by academic and practical knowledge grounded in context and reformulated at the same time (Bartley et al. 2012). Social work practices are diverse and learning through international exchange is important. TSW therefore focuses on the specific resources and needs of people who are not usually included in social work structures. It raises questions such as what prevents people from seeking help from social workers? It also challenges social work in a general way by pointing to the lines within which social work strategies and solutions are commonly framed.

TSW supports the necessary *relationships between the local and the global*. Local changes and challenges are connected to global politics and economics. Processes of migration and refuge are caused by these changes. Social work practitioners are confronted with new clients, different cultural norms and experiences and challenges in positioning themselves in conflicts resulting from these global developments (Ahmadi 2003). Unspoken norms surface, such as what is right and what is wrong and for whom; what if the rights of individuals conflict with the cultural rights of groups? Questions like this are asked and maybe even answered daily by social workers.

TSW as a critical perspective of social work also commits to *equality and equal rights*. Social work as a Human Rights profession is deeply committed to a wider
ethical framework (Bisman and Bohannon 2014). In addition to national-focused
social work TSW makes the claim for positioning itself in a global context. It states
that topics like women’s rights, racism and poverty cannot be approached on the local
level only. All of these inequalities are acted out between people on the local level but
need to be tackled on a structural level. Poverty can only be addressed when trade
structures and global economies are changed. Gender equality can only be reached by
talking about power hierarchies and construction of femininities and masculinities.
TSW needs to take political standpoints in these debates and needs to get involved in
political processes from the local to the global level (Gray and Fook 2004).

Conclusion

TSW can function as a critical perspective claiming sensitivity for boundaries and pointing to neglected needs and resources. The nation state is an important frame that enables social work as well as restricting it – it can both provide welfare and access to social work organisations but also exclude those without legal status in the country they reside in. Claims for social welfare are always combined with questions relating to the boundaries of ‘inside’ and ‘outside’. Social work practices are often limited to providing support to citizens only or, at least, to those people with legal status. Having a particular citizenship therefore frames social work to a great extent.

TSW itself has limits. Its main concern is the crossing of borders (physically as well as virtually). This raises the question as to the difference from intra-national migration. Why not take intra-national migration into account when thinking about transnational social work? The common focus of both types of migration could be access to rights. Citizenship rights are only valuable if they can be claimed as ‘rights to have rights’ (Arendt 1951).

TSW as a critical perspective enlarges the picture from the needs of people excluded to the mechanisms of exclusion itself. How is normality constructed to give way to exclusion? How do mechanisms of ‘othering’ stabilise exclusion? TSW challenges norms and normality by pointing to the role global developments play in everybody’s lives every day. It also supports the view that crossing borders and having plural local connections are resources to draw on. This is true for clients but also for social workers. Facing the challenges of movement might enable a sensitive knowledge for the questions TSW is most concerned with.

Note

1 The ‘inside’ of a nation is itself diverse and framed by various power hierarchies. Social work acknowledges this diversity in different concepts such as social justice (Austin 2014), diversity (Appiah 2010) and intersectionality (Pease 2014).

References

Adelson, L.A., 2001. 'Against Between. A Manifesto', in S. Hassan and I. Dadi, eds, *Unpacking Europe. Towards a critical reading*. Rotterdam: Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, 19–36.
Ahmadi, N., 2003. 'Globalisation of consciousness and new challenges for international social work', *International Journal of Social Welfare* (12): 14–23. Available from: http://ehs.siu.edu/socialwork/_common/documents/articles/ahmadi.pdf [accessed 18 April 2016].

Appiah, K.A., 2010. *The honor code. How moral revolutions happen*. 1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton.

Arendt, H., 1951. *The origins of totalitarianism*. 1st ed. New York: Harcourt Brace.

Austin, M.J., ed., 2014. *Social Justice and Social Work. Rediscovering a Core Value of the Profession*. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi: SAGE.

Bartley, A., Beddoe, L., Fouché, C. and Harington, P., 2012. 'Transnational Social Workers. Making the Profession a Transnational Professional Space', *International Journal of Population Research* 1: 1–11.

Bisman, C., and Bohannon, A., 2014. *Social Work. Value-Guided Practice for a Global Society*. New York: Columbia University Press.

Duscha, A., and Witte, M.D., 2013. 'Erziehungshilfe und Transnationalisierung. Eine Einführung', *Sozialmagazin* 38(9–10): 6–13.

Faist, T., 2011. 'Transnationalism. Migrant Incorporation beyond Methodological Nationalism', in Heinrich Böll Stiftung, ed., *Transnationalismus & Migration. Dossier*, 25–33.

Furman, R., Negi, N.J., Schatz, M.C.S. and Jones, S., 2008. 'Transnational Social Work. Using a wraparound model', *Global Networks* 8(4): 496–503.

Furman, R., Negi, N.J., and Salvador, R., 2010. 'An Introduction to Transnational Social Work', in N.J. Negi and R. Furman, eds, *Transnational Social Work Practice*. New York: Columbia University Press, 3–19.

Gil, D.G., 2012. 'Social Work, Social Policy, and Welfarism', in M. Gray, J. Midgley, and S.A. Webb, eds, *The Sage Handbook of Social Work*. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi, Singapore: SAGE, 19–32.

Glick Schiller, N., Basch, L., and Szanton-Blanc, C., 1992. 'Transnationalism: A New Analytic Framework for Understanding Migration', *Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences* (645): 1–24.

Gray, M. and Hetherington, T., 2013. 'Indigenization, indigenous social work and decolonization: mapping the theoretical terrain', in M. Gray, J. Coates, M. Yellow Bird and T. Hetherington, eds, *Decolonizing social work*. Burlington: Ashgate Pub. Company (Contemporary social work studies), 25–41.

Gray, M., Coates, J., and Hetherington, T., 2010. 'Hearing Indigenous and Local Voices in Mainstream Social Work', in M. Gray, J. Coates, and M. Yellow Bird, eds, *Indigenous social work around the world. Towards culturally relevant education and practice*. Farnham, England, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 257–69.

Gray, M., and Fook, J., 2004. 'The Quest for a Universal Social Work: Some Issues and Implications', *Social Work Education* 23(5): 625–44.

Hayes, D., 2005. 'Social Work with Asylum Seekers and Others Subject to Immigration Control', in R. Adams et al., eds, *Social work futures. Crossing boundaries, transforming practice*. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Houndmills; and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 182–94.

Herz, A., and Olivier, C., 2013. 'Das Transmigrantische der Sozialen Arbeit. Thematischer Aufriss einer spannungsreichen Suchbewegung', in A. Herz and C. Olivier, eds, *Transmigration und Soziale Arbeit. Ein öffnender Blick auf Alltagswelten*. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Hohengehren, 1–18.

Holliday, A., Kullman, J., and Hyde, M., 2004. *Intercultural communication. An advanced resource book*. London, New York: Routledge.
IASSW, and IFSW, 2004. *Global Standards for the Education and Training of the Social Work Profession* [online]. IASSW; IFSW. Available from: http://cdn.ifsw.org/assets/ ifsw_65044-3.pdf [Accessed 26 February 2012].

IFSW, 2012. *Global Standards* [online]. International Federation of Social Workers. Available from: http://ifsw.org/policies/global-standards/ [Accessed 10 March 2014].

IOM, 2010. *Gender, Migration and Remittances* [online]. International Organization for Migration. Available from: www.iom.int/sites/default/files/about-iom/Gender-migration- remittances-infosheet.pdf, updated on 27/08/2010 [Accessed 18 August 2014].

Kniffki, J., 2011. 'Lokale Folgewirkungen transnationaler Prozesse', in C. Reutlinger, J. Kniffki, and N. Baghdadi, eds, *Die soziale Welt quer denken. Transnationalisierung und ihre Folgen für die soziale Arbeit*. Berlin: Frank & Timme, 63–80.

Leiprecht, R., and Vogel, D., 2008. 'Transkulturalität und Transnationalität als Herausforderung für die Gestaltung Sozialer Arbeit und sozialer Dienste vor Ort', in H.G. Homfeldt, W. Schröer, and C. Schweppe, eds, *Soziale Arbeit und Transnationalität. Herausforderungen eines spannungsreichen Bezug's*. Weinheim, München: Juventa, 25–44.

Levitt, P., and Glick Schiller, N., 2004. 'Conceptualizing Simultaneity. A Transnational Social Field Perspective on Society', *International Migration Review* 38(145): 595–629.

Lightman, E., 2012. 'Transnational Social Policy and Migration', in A.S. Chambon, W. Schröer, and C. Schweppe, eds, *Transnational Social Support*. New York: Routledge, 13–29.

Lyons, K., and Huegler, N., 2012. 'Migration and Refugees', in L.M. Healy and R.J. Link, eds, *Handbook of International Social Work. Human rights, development, and the global profession*. New York: Oxford University Press, 220–25.

Midgley, J., 2001. 'Issues in International Social Work. Resolving Critical Debates in the Profession', *Journal of Social Work* 1(1): 21–35.

Midgley, J., 2010. 'Promoting Reciprocal International Social Work Exchanges. Professional Imperialism Revisited', in M. Gray, J. Coates, and M. Yellow Bird, eds, *Indigenous social work around the world. Towards culturally relevant education and practice*. Farnham, England, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 31–45.

Owen, D., 2011. *Transnational Citizenship and Rights of Political Participation* [online]. Available from: publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/files/22387/Transnational_Citizenship. pdf [Accessed 15 July 2012].

Pease, B., 2014. 'Transforming Privileged Subjectivities. Toward a Pedagogy of the Oppressor', in M. Pallotta-Chiarolli and B. Pease, eds, *The Politics of Recognition and Social Justice. Transforming Subjectivities and New Forms of Resistance*. New York: Routledge, 159–72.

Römhild, R., 2004. 'Global Heimat Germany. Migration and the Transnationalization of the Nation-State', *Transit* 1(1): 1–8. Available online at www.escholarship.org/uc/ item/57z2470p.pdf [Accessed 14 April 2014].

Samovar, L.A., Porter, R.E., and McDaniel, E.R., eds, 2006. *Intercultural Communication. A Reader*. 11th ed. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.

Soysal, Y.N., 2011. 'Postnational Citizenship. Rights and Obligations of Individuality', in Heinrich Böll Stiftung, ed. *Transnationalismus & Migration. Dossier*, 73–7.

Staub-Bernasconi, S., 2012. 'Social Work as Theory and Practice', in L.M. Healy and R.J. Link, eds, *Handbook of International Social Work. Human rights, development, and the global profession*. New York: Oxford University Press, 30–36.

Teater, B., 2014. *An introduction to applying social work theories and methods*. 2nd ed. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education; Open University Press.
## 2 International social work – an overview

Ute Straub

Why should students, teachers and social workers concern themselves with international perspectives in their work? Is social work, on the basis of the varying legal situations, not limited to a certain location (Gray and Webb 2008)? Can there be such a person as an ‘international social worker’? Further critical questions are: isn’t there enough to be done at the local level; isn’t the idea of being globally effective perhaps part of the (often disappointed) fantasy of omnipotence that afflicts ‘do-gooders’, who imagine they can save the world, or does it have something to do with professional vanity – with wanting to polish up one’s own image, so as to be able to compete with others on the international stage (Webb 2003)?

On the other hand, global interdependence leads to the situation where significant new areas of international responsibilities are opening up, so that the tasks and the working environment of social work are changing:

* Jointly acquired knowledge and exchanges about field projects, teaching and research, as well as a global professional literacy strengthen the professional profile regarding the commitment to contribute to solving global social problems (Healy 2014: 378).

* Worldwide social upheavals and disturbances, as a result of climate change and migration as well as the growing number of refugees, change the focus and aims of local social work and demand competencies in new fields of practice, such as disaster relief and management (Mathbor and Bourassa 2012; Dominelli 2014), social development (Midgley 1995; Homfeldt and Reutlinger 2009) and ecology-oriented approaches (Alston and Besthorn 2012).

* Neoliberalism as a constantly expanding political guideline makes it necessary to defend the profession as a politically independent entity (Ferguson 2015; Abramowitz 2012).

* Global governance as a political form of globalisation, which also includes non-governmental organisations, has become an important dimension of international social work (Bähr et al. 2014: 15)

* Social problems have a growing mutual impact, both in industrial and in developing countries. Furthermore, innovations in practice with certain target groups that have been developed in the global south are also relevant for the north, e.g. families or victims/offenders (Straub 2012: 47ff).
* The self-definition of social work as a human rights profession (Staub-Bernasconi 2008; IASSW 2015) demands the extension of activities beyond national borders.

* Through the formation of international umbrella organisations and various global initiatives, most recently the Global Agenda for Social Work and Social Development (see below), the profession now is globally present.

This chapter aims to give an overview of international perspectives in social work. The focus will be on the following questions: What formal structures are there in international social work? What issues are being discussed?

## Definition

As far as a definition of International Social Work (ISW) is concerned, it is repeatedly emphasised that a binding definition does not exist: it is ‘a slippery phrase with various meanings’ (Dominelli 2012: 42). Healy (2001) and Cox and Pawar (2006) have to be thanked for the current, most-frequently cited listing of the dimensions of international social work. These are as follows:

* Internationally related domestic practice and advocacy, because as a consequence of globalisation, it is no longer possible to work on the local level without an international perspective.

* Professional exchange has become inevitable as a result of global interdependence. It is necessary, however, to create or expand corresponding structures in order to be able to exchange information at different levels (teaching, research, and practice).

* International practice¹ assumes that social work has the task and the competence to actively disseminate professional values, targets and methods.

* International policy development and advocacy describes the political dimension of social work, without which it would be impossible to achieve the goal of implementing greater social justice.

* Promoting social work around the world as an integrated international profession (Cox and Pawar 2006: 20, 25ff) implies that the diversity of the profession is taken into account, which can be very different depending on local conditions, and also includes the integration of the themes of human rights, globalisation, ecology and social development (Cox and Pawar 2006: 19, 37ff).

* In addition, Healy (2014: 369ff) mentions three different directions in which ISW is developing: first, as a movement that campaigns for the spread of universal standards for practice and training; second, as a form of specific practice; and third, as a (professional-) political activity which strives to be involved in global political developments.

## International organisations

The three big umbrella organisations,² the International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW), the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW)
and the International Council of Social Welfare (ICSW) form the umbrella for social work on the global level and cooperate closely with regional associations in Africa, Asia/Pacific, Europe, Latin America/Caribbean, and North America. All of them trace their origins to the First International Conference of Social Work that took place in Paris in 1928 (Healy 2008; Kruse 2009; Lyons and Lawrence 2009: 108ff). Women played a very important role in national women's movements and associations and, above all, in the International Council of Women (ICW). These were partly the same women who joined the women's and peace movements and were responsible for the development of social work as a women's profession (Kniephoff-Knebel 2006; Kruse 2009).

Although worldwide exchange was interrupted by the Second World War, it was possible to revive the international dimension of social work and the commitment to human rights and social justice (Cox and Pawar 2006: 55ff; Hall 2013; Healy and Hall 2009). This article concentrates on a part of each of the umbrella organisations; IASSW is used as an example of the historical ups and downs of the international collaboration; the commitment to human rights is shown through the example of IFSW; and for the ICSW, its development as a representational body of NGOs, especially from the global south, is highlighted.

## IASSW

Its members are universities that offer Social Work as a course of study, but also individuals (teachers) can become members. Various European schools of social work met in Berlin in 1929 to launch the ‘International Committee of Social Work’ (Kniephoff-Knebel and Seibel 2008). The founding members were from 46 schools from 11 countries. They agreed that the goal should be: ‘to bring about an exchange of opinion and experience between schools of social work and to deal with all problems of international co-operation of these schools’ (Healy 2008: 2).

There were great conflicts on the issues of religious ties versus neutrality, and nationalistic-militaristic trends versus pacifism. The German schools played an inglorious role: in 1936 they demanded the resignation of Alice Salomon, a Jew, as President of the International Committee and withdrew from the IASSW when they were unable to get their way. The first post-war conference took place in Paris in 1959. In the following years, the organisation, which thus far had been limited to the global north, began to open itself to the global south. For the first time, world conferences were held outside Europe and North America (Healy and Hall 2009: 251) and with the coming of new members from previously colonised, now independent, African and Asian countries, the community grew. The 1980s brought, on the one hand, initial contact with Eastern European countries and the Soviet Union and on the other hand, a renewed split; there were disagreements on how to deal with the issue of apartheid, and regarding the role of the South African Association of Social Workers (Healy and Hall 2009: 254), leading to the temporary resignation of the Scandinavian schools. In 2004, after 76 years, the first non-northern President, Abye Tasse from Ethiopia, was chosen.
## IFSW

Originally founded in 1932 and called ‘The International Permanent Secretariat of Social Workers’, the organisation was renamed ‘The International Federation of Social Workers’ at the World Conference in Munich in 1956. Its members are the professional associations of social workers worldwide, but only one organisation per country is allowed to become a member (if necessary, in a coordinated coalition). From the very beginning, the subject of ethics was of particular importance, and in 1957, work on compiling the ethical principles of social work was begun (Healy and Hall 2009: 245). Since the 1980s, the focus of the IFSW has been on human rights: externally, by engaging in public relations, and internally, by promoting among its professional members an awareness of their own human rights legacy. A human rights commission works actively as an advocate for those social workers who are persecuted or arrested because of their politically oriented engagement. In addition, the IFSW has published two policy documents: ‘Social Work and Human Rights’ (1994) and ‘Social Work and Children’s Rights’ (2002) (Hall 2013). Policy statements regarding human rights topics are published regularly, most recently on ‘Reproductive Tourism’ (cross-border reproductive services) and ‘Elderly and Old People’ (IFSW).

## ICSW

Currently, a growing number of more than 80 non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in the area of social services and social development from 70 countries are represented by national committees in the ICSW (ICSW; Healy and Hall 2009: 245). Originally called the ‘International Conference of Social Work’, in 1966 the organisation was renamed the ‘International Council on Social Welfare’. This was done in order to show that members and their activities were not limited to professional social work; rather that they cooperate in an inter-disciplinary manner, and that through the NGOs, non-professional and para-professional social activists could also be included. The preparation for and participation in the UN Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen in 1995 showed the importance of the strong link between Promoting Social Welfare and the Development Movement.

## Joint activities

All three organisations have a consultative status with the UN and cooperate with various UN organisations: the World Health Organization (WHO), the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Of great importance for the exchange regarding practice, teaching and policy-oriented issues are: (a) international conferences;³ (b) jointly issued professional journals;⁴ and (c) basic policy papers.

The most important joint policy papers are ‘Ethics in Social Work, Statement of Principles’ and ‘Global Standards for Social Work Education and Training of
the Social Work Profession', both of which were published in 2004. In 2010 it was decided to revise them every ten years. Discussions about conflicts have entered the professional debate in the context of globalisation and post-colonialism (Gray et al. 2010; Midgley 2010; Rehklau and Lutz 2009). Thus, new categories such as 'social cohesion' and 'social development' are incorporated. Similarly, 'indigenous knowledge' has been recognised as an essential part of social work (Straub 2014). In the past, the worldwide standardisation of (ethical) norms and professional standards had been paramount, in order to create a common basis for all the disparate members and to make their voices heard regarding the concerns of social work on the political level. Now, however, the focus of attention is increasingly directed at diversity within the globally active profession itself.

The 'Global Standards for the Education and Training of the Social Work Profession' (IASSW) describe the guidelines and goals for schools/universities, for the curriculum, internships, the teaching staff and students as well as for the administration and management of educational institutions. The latest joint effort is the ten-year project 'Global Agenda for Social Work and Social Development' (IFSW), which was publicly launched in 2010. It is supposed to monitor the activities of social workers, teachers and practitioners in the area of social work and development and make it more visible in the political arena, thus strengthening its influence. In addition, the content of the Global Agenda complies with the UN's Millenium Development Goals (MDG) and the Post-2015 Development Agenda. The monitoring and checking instrument draws on information from members about successful approaches in practice and in teaching.

## Critical discussion of internationalisation

Although there is no doubt that international organisations have contributed a great deal to the spread, professionalisation and acceptance of social work, their work has long been oriented towards the social work of the global north. It seems that the organisations represent less than half the nations of the world (Cox and Pawar 2006: 18). This not only raises the question of how representative they are but shows as well that social work as a profession still is either not very widespread, fails to meet the standards adequately or that the organisations may not be accepted as representative.

Though slowly, but with increasing openness toward diversity in their own ranks, global organisations are beginning to open up to the voices of the global south (Straub 2012).

## Colonisation/professional imperialism

In the colonial period, national or church social organisations took over the function of supporting the colonial powers in spreading their stance and attitudes rather than contributing to local development (Cox and Pawar 2006: 3ff). Modernisation theories of the 1950s (Coates et al. 2006: 10ff), based on the idea that only through adaptation to northern standards would it be possible to join the
modern and ‘civilised’ world, were reflected in a brutal way in the ‘welfare treatments’ of, for example, Canada’s First Nations (Bruyere 2010) and Australia’s aborigines (Fejo-King 2014). Even after most of the colonies had become ‘independent’, the perception ‘West is Best’ continued (and continues), prevailed and was shared by many of the local political elites (Cox and Pawar 2006: 5; Midgley 2010: 31ff). This shows effects that continue to be felt even today, such as a lack of appreciation of, or even disrespect for, local and indigenous values and lifestyles (for a list of the first critics of traditional social work see Osei-Hwedie and Rankopo 2007: 19).

In the 1980s, Midgley coined the term ‘professional imperialism’ to describe the colonial as well as the current post-colonial export of northern (education and training) concepts of social work to countries of the global south. Thirty years later, he concluded that not much had changed, especially in regard to standards of training, teaching content, accreditation requirements for courses of study and the resulting hegemony of northern approaches over the southern education market (Cox and Pawar 2006: 6; Midgley 2010). Tamburro argues that the phase of colonisation has by no means ended (Tamburro 2013: 4) and demands the ‘de-colonisation’ of social work.

The continually recurring debate about universalism versus cultural relativity (for the genesis of the debate about universal or differentiated social work see Bar-On 2003: 27; Healy 2007) reflects the increasingly critical attitude in the global south towards northern social work. Can action-theoretical approaches that were developed in a de-traditionalised and individualising society and in the context of an urban environment, industrialisation and ‘social question’ in the global north be transferred to developing societies? To what extent are traditional/local approaches considered? These and related questions have not been answered conclusively and continue to be discussed at national and international gatherings.

A further critical objection concerns the possibilities for participation: those who are in a position to take part in the discussion about professional development on the global stage are usually the academically educated and privileged and not grassroots social workers. Financial problems and the lack of internationally recognised training and language barriers prevent the majority of social workers – even in the IFSW member countries – from participating (Haug 2005). All this presents new challenges to the efforts made so far to find internationally accepted definitions and standards for the profession and its training.

## Social work of the south

One expression of the resistance to ‘professional imperialism’ is the social work of the south, which sets different priorities in both theory and practice. This can be seen in the priority of (socio-politically oriented) approaches like social development instead of individual help (inherent in the system).

Established individualising casework and clinical social work are substituted by educational and community work and organisation which builds awareness, strengthens the community and opposes repression (Pawar and Cox 2009: 25ff;
Rehklau and Lutz 2009: 40; Midgley 2010). These approaches are often clearly politically oriented and, in contrast to the neoliberal tendencies of the north, they call for an active role in bringing about socio-political changes, above all in the fight against poverty, landlessness and lack of education. Therefore: (a) radicalisation is a characteristic of social work of the south. Further characteristics are: (b) authentication, which means the focus is placed on local knowledge resources and processes; and (c) reconceptualisation – the orientation of social work practice toward the existing socio-political situations and efforts to change them (Osei-Hwedie and Rankopo 2007: 20; Rehklau and Lutz 2009: 43ff).

An essential part of the social work of the south is the indigenous approach or the ‘indigenisation’ of social work (Gray et al. 2010). In the debate about the mutual influencing of northern and southern approaches (Osei-Hwedie and Rankopo 2007: 20; Rehklau and Lutz 2009: 43ff), Barise describes indigenisation as a mainly ‘bottom-up’ process that develops approaches rooted in the local context but also adjusts mainstream social work to it (Barise 2005).⁵

## Conclusion

Internationalism has been an essential characteristic of social work since its beginnings as a profession. This is true in spite of the fact that this dimension was lost during the Second World War and could only be regained in the post-war years (Pfaffenberger 1994). International contact and exchange have contributed greatly to professionalisation and to making the profession and its contribution to civil society and social justice more visible all over the world. Activities are currently continuing on this point through the Global Agenda, and, at the same time, cooperation with the UN is being strengthened and made more effective so as to take advantage of synergy effects (IASSW 2015). Critical voices from the global south and indigenous groups have ensured that local and cultural/ethnic characteristics as well as norms and values of the profession, long considered to be laws, have been called into question. Furthermore, the post-colonial legacy has been the subject of (self-)critical discussion in international professional debates. One challenge is the establishment of areas of practice in which social work can bring in its inter-disciplinary competencies and highly flexible intervention possibilities, as, for instance, in the management of natural disasters and flows of refugees (Cox and Pawar 2006: 356ff). A central future field of activity will be (local) social development, which has to become a part of training, practice and research as a must, if the profession wishes to be internationally qualified and not surrender these tasks to other disciplines (Patel 2009).

Another topic of international social work in this context will be the question about varying training levels (social assistant, social worker, senior social worker), so that it will be possible to establish social work in order to meet local requirements and needs (Cox and Pawar 2006: 361ff).

The chief challenge of the coming years, however, will be to counter neoliberal developments including marketisation, consumerisation, and managerialisation – a tendency that threatens social work in its original function as the advocate for
social justice in many countries. Social work is (once again) in danger of becoming
instrumentalised to carry out policies oriented towards discrimination and
exclusion. It is necessary to maintain and strengthen its political independence.
This autonomy is not to be viewed as a privilege, rather as the necessary degree of
freedom for its commitment to alternative social policies, and bringing about
social change for the common good (Ferguson 2015). This will depend greatly on
the extent to which global influence is gained through international umbrella
organisations and their networks. However, this in turn presupposes that the
nature and content of the proposed advocacy is accepted equally in the global
north and south.

## Notes

1. This is also valid for transnational social work. For definition and differentiation see Schwarzer, Chapter 1.

2. This chapter only refers to the big three umbrella organisations; their regional associations, which are of course international organisations as well, and other international profession-oriented federations like the International Consortium for Social Development are not taken into account.

3. E.g. World Conference 2014 in Melbourne, Australia, as well as the next one to be held in Seoul, South Korea in 2016.

4. Journals *International Social Work* and *Social Dialogue*, a monthly newsletter 'Global Cooperation'.

5. A chronological list of the definitions of indigenisation, see Gray and Coates (2010: 26ff).

## References

Abramowitz, M., 2012. 'Theorising the neoliberal welfare state for social work', in M. Gray, J.O. Midgley, and S.A. Webb, eds, *Sage handbook of social work*. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 33–50.

Alston, M., and Besthorn, F.H., 2012. 'Environment and sustainability', in K.H. Lyons et al., eds, *Sage handbook of international social work*. London: SAGE Publications, 56–69.

Bähr, C., et al., 2014. 'Weltatlas Soziale Arbeit. Jenseits aller Vermessungen', in C. Bähr, et al., eds, *Weltatlas Soziale Arbeit. Jenseits aller Vermessungen*. Weinheim, Basel: Beltz Juventa, 9–30.

Barise, A., 2005. 'Social work with Muslims. Insights from the teachings of Islam', *Critical Social Work* 6(2). Available from: www1.uwindsor.ca/criticalsocialwork/social-work-with-muslims-insights-from-the-teachings-of-islam [Accessed 13 May 2016].

Bar-On, A., 2003. 'Indigenous practice. Some informed guesses – self-evident but impossible', *Social Work/ Maatskaplijke Werk* 39(1): 26–40.

Bruyere, G., 2010. 'Picking up, what is left by the trail. The emerging spirit of aboriginal education in Canada', in M. Gray, J. Coates, and M. Yellowbird, eds, *Indigenous social work around the world. Towards culturally relevant education and practice*. Farnham: Ashgate, 231–44.

Coates, J., Gray, M., and Hetherington, T., 2006. 'An “ecospiritual” perspective. Finally, a place for indigenous approaches', *British Journal of Social Work* 36(3): 381–99.

Cox, D.R., and Pawar, M.S., 2006. *International social work. Issues, strategies, and programs*. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
Dominelli, L., 2012. 'Globalisation and indigenization. Reconciling the irreconcilable in social work?' in K.H. Lyons et al., eds, *Sage handbook of international social work*. London: SAGE Publications, 39–55.

Dominelli, L., 2014. 'Learning from our past. Climate change and disaster interventions in practice', in C. Noble, H. Strauss, and B. Littlechild, eds, *Global social work. Crossing borders, blurring boundaries*. Sydney: Sydney University Press, 341–51.

Fejo-King, C., 2014. 'Indigenism and Australian social work', in C. Noble, H. Strauss, and B. Littlechild, eds, *Global social work. Crossing borders, blurring boundaries*. Sydney: Sydney University Press, 55–68.

Ferguson, I., 2015. *Hope over fear*, with assistance from Bicocca-University, Milano (Social Work Education in Europe). Available online at www.eassw.org/userfiles/file/eassw-programma-finale-20150529.pdf, updated on 6/29/2015, [Accessed 10 January 2016].

Gray, M., and Coates, J., 2010. 'From “Indigenization” to Cultural Relevance', in M. Gray, J. Coates, and M. Yellowbird, eds, *Indigenous social work around the world. Towards culturally relevant education and practice*. Farnham: Ashgate, 13–30.

Gray, M., and Webb, S.A., 2008. 'The myth of global social work. Double standards and the local-global divide', *Journal of Progressive Human Services* 19(1): 61–6.

Gray, M., Yellowbird, M., and Coates, J., 2010. 'Towards an understanding of indigenous social work', in M. Gray, J. Coates, and M. Yellowbird, eds, *Indigenous social work around the world. Towards culturally relevant education and practice*. Farnham: Ashgate, 49–58.

Hall, N., 2013. 'International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW)', *Encyclopedia of Social Work*. Available online at http://socialwork.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.001.0001/acrefore-9780199975839-e-202 [Accessed 31 July 2015].

Haug, E., 2005. 'Critical reflections on the emerging discourse of international social work', *International Social Work* 48(2): 126–35.

Healy, L.M., 2001. *International social work. Professional action in an interdependent world*. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Healy, L.M., 2007. 'Universalism and cultural relativism in social work ethics', *International Social Work* 20(1): 11–26.

Healy, L.M., 2008. 'Introduction. A brief journey through the 80 year history of the international association of schools of social work', *Social Work and Society* 6(1): 1–13.

Healy, L.M., 2014. 'Global education for social work. Old debates and future directions for international social work', in C. Noble, H. Strauss, and B. Littlechild, eds, *Global social work. Crossing borders, blurring boundaries*. Sydney: Sydney University Press, 369–80.

Healy, L.M., and Hall, N., 2009. 'Internationale Organisationen der Sozialen Arbeit', in L. Wagner and R. Lutz, eds, *Internationale Perspektiven Sozialer Arbeit*. Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag, 243–60.

Homfeldt, H.G., and Reutlinger, C., eds, 2009. *Soziale Arbeit und Soziale Entwicklung*. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.

IASSW [online]. International Association of Schools of Social Work. Available from: www.iassw-aiets.org/ [Accessed 25 November 2015].

IASSW. *Global Standards for Social Work Education and Training* [online]. International Association of Schools of Social Work. Available from: www.iassw-aiets.org/global-standards-for-social-work-education-and-training [Accessed 25 November 2015].

IASSW, 2015. *IASSW mission within the UN* [online]. International Association of Schools of Social Work. Available from: www.iassw-aiets.org/uploads/file/20140929_IASSW%20mission%20with%20the%20UN.pdf [Accessed 31 July 2015].

ICSW [online]. International Council on Social Welfare. Available from: www.icsw.org/ [Accessed 25 November 2015].
ICSW, Members list [online]. International Council on Social Welfare. Available from: www.icsw.org/index.php/members/members-list [Accessed 25 November 2015].

IFSW [online]. International Federation of Social Workers. Available from: http://ifsw.org/ [Accessed 25 November 2015].

IFSW. *Global Agenda for Social Work and Social Development* [online]. International Federation of Social Workers. Available from: http://ifsw.org/the-global-agenda-observatory/ [Accessed 25 November 2015].

IFSW. *Policies* [online]. International Federation of Social Workers. Available from: http://ifsw.org/policies/ [Accessed 25 November 2015].

International Consortium for Social Development [online]. Available from: www.socialdevelopment.net/ [Accessed 20 November 2015].

Kniephoff-Knebel, A., 2006. *Internationalisierung in der sozialen Arbeit. Eine verlorene Dimension der weiblich geprägten Berufs- und Ideengeschichte*. Schwalbach/Ts.: Wochenschau-Verlag.

Kniephoff-Knebel, A., and Seibel, F.W., 2008. 'Establishing international cooperation in social work education. The first decade of the "International Committee of Schools for Social Work"', (ICSSW). *International Social Work* (51, November 2008), 790–812.

Kruse, E., 2009. 'Zur Geschichte der internationalen Dimension in der Sozialen Arbeit', in L. Wagner and R. Lutz, eds, *Internationale Perspektiven Sozialer Arbeit*. Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag, 15–32.

Lyons, K., and Lawrence, S., 2009. 'Social work as an international profession. Origins, organisations and networks', in S. Lawrence et al., eds, *Introducing International Social Work*. Exeter: Learning Matters Ltd., 108–20.

Mathbor, G.M., and Bourassa, J., 2012. 'Disaster management and humanitarian action', in K.H. Lyons et al., eds, *Sage handbook of international social work*. London: SAGE Publications, 294–310.

Midgley, J.O., 1995. *Social development. The developmental perspective in social welfare*. London: Sage.

Midgley, J.O., 2010. 'Promoting reciprocal international social work exchanges. Professional imperialism revisited', in M. Gray, J. Coates, and M. Yellowbird, eds, *Indigenous social work around the world. Towards culturally relevant education and practice*. Farnham: Ashgate, 31–45.

Osei-Hwedie, K., and Rankopo, M., 2007. 'The socio-cultural basis of indigenising social work in Southern Africa', in C. Rehklau and R. Lutz, eds, *Sozialarbeit des Südens*. Oldenburg: Paulo Freire Verlag, 19–30.

Patel, L., 2009. 'Developmental social work in South Africa. Lessons from the south', in H.G. Homfeldt and C. Reutlinger, eds, *Soziale Arbeit und Soziale Entwicklung*. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren, 47–67.

Pawar, M., and Cox, D.R., 2009. 'The importance of social development for the internationalization of social work', in H.G. Homfeldt and C. Reutlinger, eds, *Soziale Arbeit und Soziale Entwicklung*. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren, 25–46.

Pfaffenberger, H., 1994. 'Zeitgeschichtliche Abläufe und Entwicklungen der internationalen Dimension der deutschen Sozialpädagogik/Sozialarbeit', in F. Hamburger, ed., *Innovation durch Grenzüberschreitung*. Rheinfelden, Berlin: Schäuble Verlag, 7–19.

Rehklau, C., and Lutz, R., 2009. 'Partnerschaft oder Kolonialisation?' in L. Wagner and R. Lutz, eds, *Internationale Perspektiven Sozialer Arbeit*. Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag, 33–53.

Staub-Bernasconi, S., 2008. 'Menschenrechte in ihrer Relevanz für die Theorie und Praxis Sozialer Arbeit. Was haben Menschenrechte überhaupt in der Sozialen Arbeit zu suchen?' *Widersprüche, Bielefeld: Kleine Verlag* (107): 9–32.
Straub, U., 2012. 'Sharing circles. Family group conferences in the context of indigenized social work', in R. Clarijs and T. Malmberg, eds, *The quiet revolution. Aggrandizing people power by family group conferences*. Amsterdam: SWP Publishing, 43–53.

Straub, U., 2014. 'Whose voice is being heard? Die Diskussion um die neue Definition für Soziale Arbeit von IASSW und ISSW', *FORUM sozial* 2(14): 29–30.

Tamburro, A., 2013. 'Including decolonization in social work education and practice', *Journal of Indigenous Social Development* 3(1): 1–16.

Webb, S.A., 2003. 'Local orders and global chaos in social work', *European Journal of Social Work* 6(2): 191–204.
3 Towards an integrated
theoretical framework for
transnational social work

Arvind Kumar Agrawal

The emerging inter-related world necessitates a social work perspective which has to deal with global issues that are neither localised nor nation-specific but rather have a transnational character such as: increased incidences of communal strife; civil war; cross-border conflicts; terrorism; problems of refugees; violence against women; hunger; AIDS; environmental degradation etc. ‘Unless we can offer an alternative to the struggle between Jihad and McWorld, the epoch on whose threshold we stand – post-communist, post-industrial, post-national, yet sectarian, fearful, and bigoted – is likely also to be post-democratic’ (Barber 2004). The fast-paced powerful juggernaut of globalisation is commonly viewed as a Western evil-incarnated ideology out to annihilate non-Western culture, resisted by traditional cultural protagonists leading to cultural strife. Besides contributing to paranoid, parochial recidivist tribalism as seen in Bosnia, Rwanda, Ossetia and Iraq, it seems to drag humanity into new miseries where mostly the weaker sections, minorities, women and children suffer.

A theoretical framework for transnational social work has to be based on an integrated approach with inputs from all over the world that have in the past provided evidence of sustainable solutions to problems and issues faced. Edward Said highlights the circulation of ideas and travelling theory in his essay *The World, the Text and the Critic*. He welcomes travelling theories because they can unblock intellectual and cultural formations, however, he cautions against ideas turning into dogma (Said 1984). The grim reality of a world full of strife and problems highlights an urgent need to look for an alternative framework for transnational social work.

Referring to the circulation of ideas, Amartya Sen observes:

> The misdiagnosis that globalisation of ideas and practices has to be resisted because it entails dreaded Westernisation has played quite a regressive part in the colonial and postcolonial world. This assumption incites parochial tendencies and undermines the possibility of objectivity in science and knowledge. It is not only counterproductive in itself; given the global interactions throughout history, it can also cause non-western societies to shoot themselves in the foot – even in their precious cultural foot.

(Sen 2004: 17)
In fact, for thousands of years there has been a history of ideas travelling
worldwide – Amartya Sen argues that in AD 1000 paper, printing press, the
crossbow, gunpowder, the iron-chain suspension bridge, the kite, the magnetic
compass, the wheel barrow, the rotary fan all travelled from China to the wider
world. Similarly, he talks of astronomy, mathematics, including the decimal
system and zero, travelling from India to Europe via the Arab world, thus laying
the foundation for the modern scientific revolution. He further establishes how
these ideas on mathematics came back to India later on from Europe through
'Western' education (Sen 2004: 16).

In view of threatening cultural intolerance, communal hatred and religious fanaticism, Hans Kueng proposes ‘a global ethic as a foundation of global society’ (Kueng 2004: 44). Defining the global ethic he says: ‘Every human being must be treated humanely; and what you wish done to yourself, do to others’ (Kueng 2004: 47). Hans Kueng suggests that the global ethic requires the development of basic values of respect for life, freedom, justice, mutual respect, readiness to help, and integrity. He concludes by quoting the UN Commission Report on Global Governance 1995 (Commission Our Global Neighborhood 1995) on the civil ethic that ‘all people share a responsibility to:

* Contribute to common good;

* Consider the impact of their actions on the security and welfare of others;

* Promote equity, including gender equity;

* Protect the interests of future generations by pursuing sustainable development and safeguarding the global commons;

* Preserve humanity's cultural and intellectual heritage;

* Be active participants in governance; and

* Work to eliminate corruption.' (Commission Our Global Neighborhood 1995: 49)

In line with Kueng's ideas, transnational social work could look for a theoretical approach based on the following three elements:

1. Peaceful co-existence with nature and treating other fellow human beings with dignity and compassion;

2. Social justice and sustainable development through a collective and synergetic effort to alleviate poverty and misery; and

3. Value pluralism and non-violence that would save humanity from cultural extremism including religious extremism.

In common with most social science disciplines, social work grew in the social milieu of the Western hemisphere, in consonance with the evolving religious,¹ cultural,² political³ and economic⁴ ethics with the backdrop of industrial and urban growth. However, unlike other social sciences, social work, a somewhat nascent discipline, rather than working on the epistemology of the discipline, concentrated more on developing strategies and methods in the shape of case work, group work and community organisation as well as the delivery of services in a professional
manner. This chapter is an attempt to look at some of the theories, namely Social Capital and Social Network Analysis (Robert Putnam), Empowerment Approach (Naila Kabeer) and Justice and Capability Approach (Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum) in contrast to indigenous approaches from India, namely Jainism; the Bishnoi Sect's philosophy and practices; Gandhian ideas, the Sarvodaya movement and Integral Humanism of Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhyaya that could be integrated in an epistemologically justifiable manner (sharing the aforementioned three elements) to beget an integrated theoretical framework for transnational social work.

## Social capital and social network analysis

Robert Putnam (2000) brought the concepts of community, social capital and social networking to centre stage of the fast emerging multi-ethnic global society. For him the connections among individuals – social networks and norms of reciprocity and trust emanating from them – constitute social capital. Social capital helps members of densely networked communities to pursue their shared goals. He gave two more concepts: *bonding* – networks between members of similar culture sharing communities – and *bridging* – networks between members of dissimilar culture sharing communities. Whilst bonding can potentially lead to in-group and out-group formations (if one uses the terminology used by W.G. Sumner, in his book *Folkways*), social cohesion can achieve intercultural community bridging in a multi-ethnic society. It is vital for harmonious democracy with diversity. Thus, this approach could contribute to a peaceful co-existence between human beings and value (cultural) pluralism by community based social work in and between communities. In terms of Said's travelling theory, this approach has travelled far and wide, for instance, with an empirical study carried out by a Chinese immigrant scholar in New Zealand.

## Empowerment approach

Julian Rappaport points out that ‘by empowerment I mean our aim should be to enhance the possibilities for people to control their own lives’ (Wu 2011: 205). Rappaport’s concept of empowerment, ‘conveys both a psychological sense of personal control or influence and a concern with actual social influence, political power and legal rights’ (Wu 2011: 121). According to Nina Wallerstein (1992), empowerment is a social-action process that promotes participation of people, organisations, and communities towards the goals of increased individual and community control, political efficacy, improved quality of community life, and social justice.

Naila Kabeer defines empowerment as a process of change by which individuals or communities with little or no power gain the power and ability to make life choices that affect their lives (Kabeer 1999: 435ff). This notion of empowerment is inescapably bound up with the condition of disempowerment and refers to the processes by which those who have been denied the ability to make choices
acquire such ability. Disempowerment may be understood as (political/legal/
social) restrictions on participation in processes of decision making and the
expression or enforcement of one's own interests. It is precisely in this context
where the social work profession is challenged to support the empowerment of
people through political reflection and the exertion of influence on the one hand
– and strengthening individuals in order to speak up for themselves on the other
hand. This notion of empowerment could contribute to a collective and synergetic
effort to alleviate poverty and misery. We could say that this idea of empowerment
already exists in Mahatma Gandhi’s approach: Gandhi sought to empower the
weak in India as part of his struggle against colonial powers and against a highly
oppressive and discriminatory traditional feudal system. Gandhi sought to
empower the poor, oppressed castes, untouchables, minorities and women through
non-violent means and *Sarvodaya* (‘welfare’ or ‘rise of all’, implying the welfare
of the individual is inherently contained in the welfare of all). He was inspired by
John Ruskin’s book *Unto the Last* in calling for *Sarvodaya*. He picked up the
essence of non-violence and humanism from Jainism, Leo Tolstoy’s book *The
Kingdom of God is within You* and the Bible. This is a very clear example of
travelling theories (Said 1984), from one place to another – and back. Gandhi’s
concept of *Sarvodaya* focused on village industries, communal harmony, abolition
of untouchability, village sanitation, basic education, prohibition, environmental
preservation (Gandhi said, ‘Nature has enough to meet human need but not for
human greed’), welfare of tribal communities, women’s welfare, labour welfare
etc. It advocated the Spartan life, and making village communities self-reliant,
self-sufficient and free so that they would stand up for their own rights.

Gandhi propounded the concept of ‘trusteeship’ for the industrial sector. This envisages industrialists as trustees of wealth-generating industries with profits voluntarily shared with the poor, a precursor perhaps to the twenty-first century’s concept of corporate social responsibility. Gandhi advocated the awakening of consciousness of people for voluntary help to reduce inequalities, completely in line with the three elements as a common basis for social work suggested above.

In social work one of the key methods of empowerment is through advocacy,
seen as public and professional support concerning the recommendation of a
particular cause or policy, with the aim to influence decisions within political,
bureaucratic and economic institutions and systems. However, Kabeer (1999)
clarifies that those who stand to gain most from such advocacy carry very little
clout compared to those people who set the agendas in major policy-making
institutions. Thus empowerment is about change, choice and power, but its scope
and relevance will be determined by the context, i.e., by the socio-cultural and
political conditions that affect people's options. Furthermore, for empowerment
to come into being there are three dimensions of power that need to be realised:
resources, agency and achievements. *Resources* – economic, human and social –
are necessary preconditions; *agency* refers to people's capacity to define their own
life-choices and to pursue their own goals; and *achievements* are assessed in terms
of the outcomes and the constraints in achieving the desired goals or ends (Kabeer
1999: 435). Gandhi used his tools of non-violent resistance and advocacy to
persuade oppressive racist regimes in South Africa and India to amend policies and laws in favour of discriminated, oppressed and poor people. Gandhi led the great struggle for freedom based on non-violent, peaceful and passive resistance through empowerment, mass awakening and mass participation to achieve independence for India from British colonial power.

Justice and capability approach

Amartya Sen (1992) proposes an approach concerned with human capabilities and freedom. Often poverty is understood as capability deprivation; one could be deprived because of ignorance, state repression, lack of resources or traditional cultural constraints such as caste-related oppressive barriers. Sen differentiates between commodities, human functioning/capability and utility (e.g. happiness). By capability he means that people are able to attain goals and achieve something for themselves. Often freedom is defined in a rather narrow and negative way, i.e. the absence of any kind of coercion. However, it does not always include effective or substantive freedom in the sense of participation and shared decision making. For instance, there is no law to prevent a poor student pursuing higher studies in an expensive elite university but if he/she cannot afford it then he/she does not have substantive freedom. Another example refers to people with disabilities or mental health problems, who were long denied personal autonomy and independent living until social movements for Independent Living in the USA and UK gained influence in order to change restrictive policies and attitudes in the 1970s.

Hence, Sen believes that a key measure of human well-being is that a person's real quality of life is linked to their degree of substantive freedom. He believes that opulence of income or commodities in a nation or utility in terms of happiness and/or desire fulfilment does not lead to human well-being or deprivation amelioration; instead a more direct approach is required that focuses on human functioning(s) and the capability to achieve valuable functioning(s) that would lead to deprivation amelioration.

This theory recognises human heterogeneity and diversity, group disparities (such as gender, race, class or age) and different cultural and human specificities in terms of values and aspirations. However, Robert Sugden raises the question as to ‘how far Sen’s framework is operational’ (Sugden 1993: 1953) and notes that there is a great deal of disagreement about the nature of a good life (Sugden 1993: 1952f). Nussbaum (1988: 176) criticises Sen for not providing a coherent list of important capabilities. Charles Beitz (1986: 282ff) criticises Sen for making the general agreement on inter-personal comparison of well-being about the valuation of capabilities. Sen is nevertheless optimistic about achieving agreement about evaluations (Sen 1985: 53ff). This discussion could contribute to value pluralism as advocated before.

In this context, Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhyaya (1965) provides a model of ‘Integral Humanism’ quite like Gandhi’s *Sarvodaya*. Upadhyaya speaks of appropriate technology as opposed to arbitrary mechanisation, advocates sustainable consumption and sets out principles of corporate ethics and social
responsibility. This is in line with sustainable development and a peaceful co-existence with nature. This also goes well with the concept of substantive freedom advocated by Sen. Subramanian Swamy (2010) writes:

> Integral Humanism recognized that in a democratic market economy an individual has technical freedom of choice but the system without safeguards fails to accommodate the varying capabilities and endowments of a human being. Since the concept of survival of the fittest prevails in such a system, therefore some individuals achieve great personal advancement while others get trampled on or disabled in the ensuing rat race. We need to build a safety net into our policy for the underprivileged or disabled while simultaneously rewarding the meritorious or gifted. Otherwise, the politically empowered poor in a democracy who are in a majority will clash with the economically empowered rich who are the minority, thereby causing instability and upheaval in a market system.

(Swamy 2006: 82)

Going beyond Sen, Nussbaum (2000) develops the capability approach further into a more explicit political theory of universal justice and rights. While she agrees with Sen that quality of life cannot be appropriately measured by Gross National Product, she differs from Sen in arguing that substantive freedom alone can lead to human well-being (Nussbaum 2000: 70ff). She defines human capability as the capability to function well and provides a definitive list of ‘central human capabilities’ as (Ibid.: 72ff): (i) Life (defined as ‘being able to live to the end of a human life of normal length’) (Ibid.: 78); (ii) Bodily health; (iii) Bodily integrity; (iv) Senses, imagination and thought; (v) Emotions; (vi) Practical reason; (vii) Affiliation; (viii) Other species; (ix) Play; and (x) Political and material control over one’s environment. She further adds that this list ‘isolates those human capabilities that can be of central importance in any human life, whatever else the person pursues or chooses’ (Ibid.: 74). She also claims that the list represents ‘years of cross cultural discussion’ (Ibid.: 76). This list is ‘based on the commonness of myths and stories from many times and places’ that reveal ‘what it is to be human rather than something else’ (Nussbaum 1990: 217). Nussbaum further points out that the items in her list are ‘core ideas’ that constitute good human life with dignity. For Nussbaum, ‘dignified free being [is] who shapes his or her own life in co-operation and reciprocity with others’, rather than being passively shaped or pushed by the world in the manner of ‘flock’ or ‘herd’ animal (Nussbaum 2000: 72). She also clarifies unambiguously that the various capabilities do not form any hierarchy (Ibid.: 81). Rejecting cultural relativism, Nussbaum argues that the capability approach accommodates cultural diversity in many ways and that the list is a product of reflection across cultures and across time, therefore it is open and subject to constant revision (Ibid.: 77). This list is capable of ‘multiple realisability’ in different ways and in different cultures.

Human well-being requires that people enjoy certain basic capabilities to do and be what they want to be in any culture or society. For Nussbaum, it is common for all humanity and not confined to any cultural/nation specific situation (Nussbaum
and Cohen 1996: 7). As such, it could also be a helpful approach in line with our three basic elements. In this context, the above approach can be augmented with ideas of cognitive pluralism (anekandtavada) or scepticism enshrined in the philosophy of Jainism, enunciating a relativism that shuns all kinds of dogmas, absolutism and respects all possible points of views (Agrawal 2004: 223ff). This cognitive pluralism believes that every proposition is true only up to a certain extent as illustrated by the 2,500-year-old Jain legend of the seven blind men and the elephant (Wallace 1969). At the philosophical and intellectual levels this doctrine promotes ahimsa or non-violence of thoughts and ideas, and compassion.

Thus the combined approach of Sen, Nussbaum, Upadhyaya and the cognitive pluralism within Jainism (anekandtavada) can provide a fundamental political substratum to be ingrained in all constitutional guarantees, human rights laws and development policy of any society.

Coming back to Said's 'travelling theory', Jainism indeed influenced many thinkers and social reformers (Long 2009) directly or indirectly, such as Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Cesar Chavez and Thich Nhat Hanh who have followed the path of non-violence in order to influence social change positively.

In fact, one of the earliest known precursors of environmental movements in an effective non-violent manner came from India through Bishnoi religious philosophy and history. Bishnoi religious principles require the community to adhere to eco-friendly and sustainable practices such as protecting trees and animals; being simple, truthful, tolerant pacifists; and forbidding adultery, addiction and intoxication of any kind. The commitment of the Bishnoi to environmental preservation made history. In 1730, a local king needed wood for construction of a new fortress. Therefore, his soldiers went to nearby villages to cut down Khejri trees (Prosopis cineraria) that grow under harsh arid conditions and provide shade, fodder and fruit. Local Bishnoi community members hugged the trees and offered themselves to be killed before any axe harmed the trees. Consequently, on 9 September 1730, 363 lives were lost in saving trees. As a consequence, the local king had to rescind his orders and make environmental conservation a state policy. This incident inspired the 'Chipko (Hug) Movement' in post-independent India in the Uttarakhand region in 1977 led by Chandi Prasad Bhatt and Sundar Lal Bahuguna. It has inspired theorists of eco-feminism including Vandana Shiva (Shiva 2009) and Chandra Mohanty (Mohanty 2003).

**Towards an integrated theoretical paradigm for transnational social work: conclusion**

In the wake of present day global issues, an integrated approach of ideas from all over the world (in terms of Said's 'travelling theory') with pacifist principles is needed for a theoretical framework to beget practical strategies and methods in transnational social work. The basic tenets of this integrated theoretical framework should comprise the values of peaceful co-existence and value pluralism, human rights, individual liberties, free trade, liberal democratic governance along with
preservation of environment, *Sarvodaya*, non-violence (*ahimsa*), truthfulness, trusteeship and cognitive pluralism (*anekandtavada*).

After delineating these elements the next major requirement is to devise strategies for transnational social work practitioners according to the following stages:

1. Social work focuses on problem solving and aims at helping individuals, within their own environment, to solve their problems using different methods such as social casework, social group work or community organisation. In the first stage, for this integrated theoretical framework to succeed, social work professionals have to be sensitised to develop strong personal conviction and commitment concerning the principles of empowerment, justice and capability.

2. In stage two, committed social work professionals develop an attitude to strengthen the social consciousness of communities and the self-help capabilities of individuals with a missionary zeal and fierce commitment.

3. In stage three, communities and individuals should be empowered, leading to community determination (as exemplified by the Bishnoi Community in preserving the environment or to some an extent as demonstrated by volunteers of the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh).

4. The final stage would involve raising up the collective power of the people as a whole that would break the status quo and create an ethos for a system that is in the interest of all as witnessed in the non-violent struggle against colonialism led by Gandhi. This would aim for a transparent, accountable, democratically decentralised, free society based on human dignity and human rights. Such a set-up may be supported by competent social workers who contribute to the empowerment of people in order to fight discrimination, exploitation and oppression.

To some sceptics, this may appear to be utopia but there is enough empirical evidence from the last century wherein positive social reformation took place through non-violent, peaceful and passive resistance brought about by collective will, awakening people's consciousness and collective determination. Examples are as follows:

* End of oppressive British colonialism in India under the charismatic leadership of Gandhi;

* End of racial discrimination in 1960 in the USA, brought on by the efforts of Martin Luther King;

* End of apartheid in South Africa under the charismatic leadership of Nelson Mandela;

* Successful continuity of environmental movements of the Bishnoi (1730) and Chipko (Hug) movement (1977); and

* Pursuance of vegetarianism as well as non-use of intoxicants by the Bishnoi.

Hence, this integrated theoretical framework for transnational social work, too, can succeed if applied sincerely in its true spirit.
## Notes

1 Evolution of Protestant Ethics (Calvinist ethics) favouring growth of industrial capitalism as captured by Max Weber in his classical work *The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism* (1996).

2 The cultural ethics after the French Revolution that took over all of Europe.

3 Evolution of the Nation State after the Westphalian Treaty and the historic document of Magna Carta, besides the evolution of modern bureaucracy as analysed by Max Weber (1996).

4 Evolution and growth of capitalism and industrialisation over feudalism in Europe.

## References

Agrawal, A., 2004. *Max Weber and modern sociological theories*. Jaipur: Rawat Publications.

Barber, B., 2004. 'Jihad vs. McWorld', in F.J. Lechner and J. Boli, eds, *The Globalization Reader*. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 32–40.

Beitz, C.R., 1986. 'Amartya Sen's resources, values and development', *Economics and Philosophy* 2(2): 282–91.

Commission Our Global Neighborhood, 1995. *Our global neighborhood. The report of the Commission on Global Governance*. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

Deen Dayal Upadhyaya, Pt., 1965. Speech delivered on 'Integral Humanism' in Bombay on April 22–25 1965 by Pt. Deendayal Upadhyaya in the form of four lectures. Available online at http://deendayalupadhyay.org/speeches.html [Accessed 10 January 2016].

Kabeer, N., 1999. 'Resources, agency, achievements. Reflections on the measurement of women's empowerment', *Development and Change* 30(3): 435.

Kueng, H., 2004. 'A global ethic as a foundation of global society', in F.J. Lechner and J. Boli, eds, *The Globalization Reader*. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 44–50.

Long, J.D., 2009. *Jainism. An introduction*. London: I.B. Tauris.

Mohanty, C.T., 2003. *Feminism without borders. Decolonizing theory, practicing solidarity*. Durham, London: Duke University Press.

Nussbaum, M.C., 1988. *Nature, function and capability. Aristotle on political distribution*. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nussbaum, M.C., 1990. 'Aristotelian Social Democracy', in R.B. Douglass, G.M. Mara, and H.S. Richardson, eds, *Liberalism and the good*. New York: Routledge, 207–22.

Nussbaum, M.C., 2000. *Women and human development. The capability approach*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nussbaum, M.C., and Cohen, J., 1996. *For love of country. Debating the limits of patriotism*. Boston: Beacon Press.

Putnam, R., 2000. *Bowling alone. The collapse and revival of American community*. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Said, E., 1984. *The world, the text and the critic*. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

Sen, A.K., 1985. *Commodities and Capabilities*. Oxford: Elsevier.

Sen, A.K., 1992. *Inequality reexamined*. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sen, A.K., 2004. 'How to judge globalism', in F.J. Lechner and J. Boli, eds, *The Globalization Reader*. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 17.

Shiva, V. *Empowering Women* [online]. Available from: https://likeawhisper.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/empoweringwomen.pdf [Accessed 30 June 2015].

Sugden, R., 1993. 'Welfare, resources and capabilities. A review of inequality reexamined by Amartya Sen', *Journal of Economic Literature* (31): 1952–3.
Swamy, S., 2006. *Hindus under siege. The way out*. New Delhi: Har-an-and Publications.

Wallace, W.L., 1969. *Sociological theory. An introduction*. London: Heinemann.

Wallerstein, N., 1992. 'Powerlessness, empowerment and health. Implications for health promotion programs', *American Journal of Health Promotion* 6(3): 197-205.

Weber, M., 1996. *The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism*. Los Angeles, Calif.: Roxbury Pub. Co.

Wu, B., 2011. *Whose culture has capital? Class, culture, migration and mothering*. Bern: Peter Lang AG, International Academic Publishers.
# 4 Social work as a human rights profession?

Dagmar Oberlies

Social work is often characterised as a ‘human rights profession’ (UN 1994). In its Ethical Principles, the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) describes social work as ‘based on respect for the inherent worth and dignity of all people, and the rights that follow from this. Social Workers should uphold and defend each person’s physical, psychological, emotional and spiritual integrity and well-being’ (IFSW 2012b). Moreover, the Federation makes repeated reference to human rights in its global educational standards and requires educational institutions to educate students regarding the basic questions of human rights and international human rights instruments (IFSW 2012b, Subsection 8.8).

Human rights appear as something general, as something ‘you cannot not want’, and therefore face persistent criticism from postcolonial theory for their paradoxes and limitations (Spivak 1991: 235), and also from a humanistic perspective regarding their use in justifying international interventionism (Chandler 2006). However, the stance that human rights offer a non/anti-neoliberal idea (Staub-Bernasconi 2007) is, at best, unhistorical (Joas 2006) and socially romantic, and at worst misleading, since the freedom to act and contract is one of the oldest human rights (Weber 1976; Joas 2006). Therefore, human rights might better be viewed as a hybrid construct, which provides arguments on many sides but no clear orientation.

## Derivation of human rights

There is no unanimity on the question of exactly when or where the recognition of human rights began: while many start with antiquity (e.g. the Cyrus Cylinder, about 600 BC), lawyers might point to the (hard-won) Magna Carta of 1215, which prohibited arbitrary arrests. Still others see its intellectual origins in the Enlightenment or in the revolutionary and independence movements of the late eighteenth century. Contrary to these Euro-centric interpretations, Sen refers to early roots in Asia (Sen 2004).

There is also no uniform opinion on how religious values (altruism etc.) have influenced the intellectual history of human rights. Often enough, human rights had to be enforced against religious institutions (Joas 2013: 40). However, protestant dissenters who fled to America to escape religious persecution had an
important influence on the formulation of the Declaration of Independence (Joas 2006, 2013: 40). This is evident even today in how differently western and Islamic countries understand freedom of belief – as the right to change one’s belief (western), and the right to profess one’s belief without interference (see Article 10 of the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam). But still, the fact that human rights principles of the late eighteenth century have survived (with only the ‘right to resist’, originally also considered a ‘human right’, falling by the wayside), and are a worldwide reference point, shows their ‘weight’ as an idea – and as an emancipation project: just think of the abolition of slavery or of female suffrage.

The modern history of human rights begins with the atrocities of Nazi Germany, whose crimes against humanity effectively unified nations in the formulation of basic values and standards. Today all 193 recognised countries of the world are members of the United Nations and accept its founding Charter, including the obligation to protect human rights (Art. 1 No. 3). Since the founding of the United Nations, the instruments for the protection of human rights have been continually refined: if the right to civil and political freedom was the initial rallying point (first generation), economic and social rights were subsequently formulated (second generation), and supplemented by a third generation of collective rights, including rights for ethnic and cultural minorities.

Table 2.1 lists the UN conventions and protocols since 1969 and their ratification by the countries included in this book.

Currently, there are efforts to develop human rights with respect to sexual orientation and gender identity: a Resolution to this effect by the UN General Assembly has been signed by 95 (western) countries; whereas 54 – predominantly Islamic countries – have expressly rejected this Resolution.

## The theory of human rights

Human rights are consensus builders – including through their formulation. In his theory of human rights, Sen (2004: 339) describes human rights as values that are widely supported regardless of how repressive the system is and that they would find broader acceptance if they could be discussed openly.

## Human rights as a claim for respect

In the light of traditional (philosophical) understanding, human rights are ‘natural’ (inherent), i.e. pre-state rights, which can be claimed not only vis-à-vis governments but vis-à-vis all people. Every person has a right to be respected by others and is obliged to respect others. Therefore, human rights have been called ‘moral rights’ or ‘ethical demands’ (Sen 2004). They demand the same moral respect for and from all people – regardless of their national origin, gender, sexual orientation or ethnic, cultural or religious backgrounds (Benhabib 2007: 7). Therefore, human rights should apply equally to all individuals, i.e. they should be universal and egalitarian, and should not exclude anyone anywhere.
<table><caption>Table 4.1 Human rights instruments (UN)</caption><thead><tr><th>Human Rights Instrument</th><th>Abb.</th><th>Date into force</th><th>China</th><th>France</th><th>Germany</th><th>India</th><th>Israel</th><th>Malaysia</th><th>Morocco</th><th>Turkey</th><th>UK</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination</td><td>ICERD</td><td>1969</td><td>1981*</td><td>1971*</td><td>1969*</td><td>1968*</td><td>1979*</td><td>NA</td><td>1970*</td><td>2002*</td><td>1969*</td></tr><tr><td>International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights</td><td>ICCPR</td><td>1976</td><td>NA</td><td>1984*</td><td>1973*</td><td>1979*</td><td>1991*</td><td>NA</td><td>1979</td><td>2006*</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights</td><td>ICCPR-OP1</td><td>1976</td><td>NA</td><td>2008*</td><td>1993*</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>2011</td><td>2003</td></tr><tr><td>International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights</td><td>ICESCR</td><td>1976</td><td>2001*</td><td>1980*</td><td>1973</td><td>1979*</td><td>1991</td><td>NA</td><td>1979</td><td>2003*</td><td>1976*</td></tr><tr><td>Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women</td><td>CEDAW</td><td>1981</td><td>1980*</td><td>2007*</td><td>1985*</td><td>1993*</td><td>1991</td><td>1995*</td><td>1993*</td><td>2006</td><td>1999</td></tr><tr><td>Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment</td><td>CAT</td><td>1987</td><td>1988*</td><td>1980*</td><td>1990</td><td>(1997)</td><td>1991</td><td>NA</td><td>1993</td><td>2003*</td><td>1976*</td></tr><tr><td>Convention on the Rights of the Child</td><td>CRC</td><td>1990</td><td>1992*</td><td>2015</td><td>1992</td><td>1992*</td><td>1991</td><td>1995*</td><td>1993</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty</td><td>ICCPR-OP2</td><td>1991</td><td>NA</td><td>1990*</td><td>1992</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>1995</td><td>1991*</td></tr><tr><td>Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women</td><td>CEDAW-OP2</td><td>2000</td><td>NA</td><td>2003</td><td>2002</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>2002*</td><td>2009*</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tr><td>Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict</td><td>OP-CRC-AC</td><td>2002</td><td>2008*</td><td>1983*</td><td>2004*</td><td>2005*</td><td>2005</td><td>2012*</td><td>2002*</td><td>1985</td><td>1986*</td></tr><tr><td>Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography</td><td>OP-CRC-SC</td><td>2002</td><td>2002</td><td>2000</td><td>2009</td><td>2005</td><td>2008</td><td>2012*</td><td>2001</td><td>2002</td><td>2004</td></tr><tr><td>International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families</td><td>ICRMW</td><td>2003</td><td>NA</td><td>2008*</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>1993*</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment</td><td>OP-CAT</td><td>2006</td><td>NA</td><td>(2014)</td><td>2008</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>2014</td><td>(2012*)</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities</td><td>ICRPD</td><td>2008</td><td>2008</td><td>1986*</td><td>2009</td><td>2007</td><td>2012*</td><td>2010*</td><td>2009</td><td>1988</td><td>1988*</td></tr><tr><td>Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities</td><td>ICRPD</td><td>2008</td><td>NA</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>2009</td><td>2015*</td><td>2009*</td></tr><tr><td>International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance</td><td>ICPPED</td><td>2010</td><td>NA</td><td>2010*</td><td>2009*</td><td>(2007)</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>2013*</td><td>2009</td><td>2009*</td></tr><tr><td>Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights</td><td>OP-ICESCR</td><td>2013</td><td>NA</td><td>2003*</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>2004*</td><td>2003*</td></tr><tr><td>Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child</td><td></td><td>ongoing</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>2013*</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>(2012)</td><td>2004*</td><td>NA</td></tr></table>

Notes: (Signature, no ratification)

*Declarations/Reservations

NA = No Action
Two questions arise when this stance is taken as a starting point: the question of the enforceability of moral rights (Sen 2004; Benhabib 2007) and the additional question of who is obliged to grant these moral ‘rights’ (Nussbaum 2003: 37). This approach assumes that everyone knows what ‘respect for human dignity’ and ‘the right to its recognition’ mean. It does not define concepts but takes their ‘natural’ meaning for granted. However, this matter has been disputed over the centuries. Current questions are: Is there an ‘entitlement to respect’ (Appiah 2010) or does ‘recognition’ have to be earned (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)?

*Human rights as a postulate of equality*

The U.S. Declaration of Independence (1776) asserted the equality of all ‘men’ to be ‘self-evident’. Nevertheless, women (and slaves) were excluded from the category of ‘men with rights’ (Hunt 2007: 148). The distinction between civil rights, which presuppose ‘membership’, and human rights, which belong to all people, also highlights this problem (Hunt 2007: 184). Even today, conventions against racial discrimination contain permissions to treat ‘foreigners’ differently (Arts. 1, par 2 of ICERD and 3, par 2 of Directive 2000/78/EC). So, what does ‘equality’ mean in the face of obvious differences?

*Human rights as a commitment to (social) justice*

The concept of equality is closely linked to the question of social justice (Nussbaum 2003). Again, the definition of ‘just’ is subject to a (difficult) theoretical debate. There appears to be no dispute that opportunities must be equally distributed within a society (distributive justice). However, the extent to which wealth may be ‘redistributed’ is subject to controversial discussion (re-distributive justice) since there is also something ‘unjust’ about taking things away from people. Rawls (1999) focuses on the question of fairness: he argues that social inequality is only justified if it is advantageous to all. By contrast, Sen (2004, 2005, 2009) and Nussbaum (2003) wish everybody to receive as much as is needed to create lives with the greatest possible opportunities (capabilities). Human Rights are then ‘entitlements to capabilities’ (Sen 2005). Perceptions of social justice reveal a three-tier concept: (1) equal opportunities and/or rights, including equal access to resources; (2) fairness for and acceptance of everyone, embracing or tolerating differences among diverse groups, and acting ethically towards other people regardless of group membership; and (3) promoting justice and combating injustice and unfair treatment, especially for oppressed or disadvantaged groups. This implies that social justice means, ‘actively working or doing something to promote social justice … such as working to empower people from diverse groups, or doing something about injustices’ (Torres-Harding et al. 2014: 59). However, putting the idea into practice is yet another challenge that social work has to face (Hytten and Bettez 2011).
## Human rights as rights of the individual

However, the history of human rights is best described as a process, ‘in which every single human being has increasingly, and with ever-increasing motivational and sensitising effects, been viewed as sacred, and this understanding has been institutionalised in law’ (Joas 2013: 5). As Pinker puts it, human rights are a humanitarian revolution in the rise of empathy and the regard for human life (Pinker 2011: 175). Nevertheless, even if one places the individual at the centre, it is not easy to derive decision-making processes for social work, e.g.

* While it is easy to agree that there is no such thing (and should not be) as euthanasia, meaning ‘life not worth living’, abortion law in some countries such as Germany ‘allow(ed)’ an abortion if there was a danger that the child might be disabled (§ 218a, par 4 of the German Criminal Code [StGB]).

* While there is an agreement on the principle of ‘inclusion’ of children with disabilities in mainstream institutions, the German Federal Constitutional Court had to decide a case where the admission of children with brittle bone disease to an (integrative) Kindergarten could physically endanger them (BVerfG 1 BvR 91/61).

* While the ‘right of persons with disabilities to freely and responsibly decide on the number of their children’ (Art. 23, par 1) is unquestioned, it might result – in practice – in children with developmental disorders because their main contact is with their mentally challenged parents.

Moreover, the very idea of the individual endowed with (sacrosanct) rights is seen critically from a global perspective: e.g. the African Human Rights Charter emphasises obligations of the individual toward family, society, the state, and other communities, including the ‘international community’ (Art. 27), alongside rights and freedoms.

## Summarising

The concept of ‘human rights’ is anything but ‘crystal clear’ (Nussbaum 2003: 37). Its acceptability is purchased at the price of leaving underlying questions unanswered: what does human dignity mean exactly and when is it violated? How can we conceptualise ‘equality’ in a World of Inequality (Sennett 2002)? Do we all mean the same by ‘freedom of belief’ (see Art 18 ICCPR vs. Art 10 of the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam)? Why is marriage entitled to special protection (Art. 16 UDHR) – but not people who live alone?

A human rights orientation should not be understood as a timeless ‘morality’, but describes a process of continuous debate among competing interests and social relationships. However, unlike national law, the discussion lacks an arena within which the process of universalisation can be organised:

* On an international level, there is no elected parliament which could conduct a public debate (with a claim to representation).
* There are no adversarial proceedings in which various points of view can be argued on an international level.

* The arena of science has human rights specialists, but they do not reflect all parts of the world, especially not a balanced ratio.

The question remains: who defines human rights once we leave the moral high ground to look at the world from the grass roots?

## Human rights in practice

### Human rights as a government guarantee

Shortly after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Hannah Arendt pointed out that not all people have the right to have rights, but ‘only … citizens of the most prosperous and civilized countries’ (Arendt 1951: 275). The authors of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights wanted to protect these (moral) rights for all through the rule of law (Preamble). Therefore, human rights documents place obligations on signatory states (see Art. 2 of ICERD/CEDAW/CRC and Art. 4 of the ICRPD).

International human rights are commitments made by various states: they place no obligations on any state that does not place them on itself. Even after ratification, each state itself decides how to implement the obligations it has assumed into national law. ‘Development aid’ is often used as leverage to convince countries to implement human rights (see Art. 32 CRPD). Reports must be made at regular intervals, on the progress in implementing rights. Inappropriate implementation is denounced in ‘recommendations’ made by the competent UN Commission. Increasingly, human rights are being included in national constitutions – although being idealised as being supranational (Luhmann 1995: 233). Violations of law can be punished and social rights can be demanded this way. Social services are expected to support and protect such aggrieved parties. This system is, however, not without problems, since it is often the governments themselves that disregard human rights – as in the time of Hannah Arendt.

### Human rights as the everyday business of professionals

Sen sees ‘a radical contrast between an arrangement-focused concept of justice and a realization-focused understanding: the latter must, for example, concentrate on the actual behaviour of people, rather than presuming compliance by all with ideal behaviour’ (Sen 2009: 7). Therefore, in his considerations, he speaks of an ‘imperfect’ obligation (Sen 2004: 321), i.e. an obligation of an unspecified degree upon every person to advocate a right of mutual respect at all times and places.

### Professional ethics

The idea of human rights has been codified into specific ethical principles for social work professionals (IFSW 2012b). These principles place an obligation on