International Social Work - us.sagepub.com

1

1

International Social Work

I n this chapter we introduce the concept ofsocial work, especially from the global per-

spective. A general understanding of how socialwork has evolved, and continues to evolve, andhas spread globally is central to assessing thecurrent and future roles of social work as aglobal profession. We then introduce our defin-ition and understanding of international socialwork, for it is that aspect of social work, and theinternational field within which it operates, thatis the topic of this text.

Social Work

The topic of social work will require no introduc-tion to the majority of readers, but before movingto consider social work as a global profession andour definition of international social work, it maybe useful to say a few things about social workgenerally in this context. We are concerned whencolleagues in a developing country seriouslycontemplate dispensing with the term social workbecause locally it is widely misunderstood.Sometimes it is said that social work is viewed ina specific context as virtually synonymous with,to give a few examples, charitable work, one-to-one intervention by highly qualified professionals

utilizing a therapeutic approach, the welfarestate, and emerging urban concerns. Clearly theseviews are erroneous, given the nature and scopeof social work throughout its history; however,the apparent prevalence in some contexts of suchviews as those listed suggests that the social workprofession has not been as successful as it mighthave been in projecting an acceptable imageacross the developing world. A perceived ten-dency to distinguish social work from, forexample, policy concerns, community and socialdevelopment, and community-based responsesto welfare needs, suggests that a very narrowunderstanding of social work is more prevalentthan we would like to see. Furthermore, weshould perhaps acknowledge that, while many ofus would regard the breadth of social work asone of its strengths, it is very likely that that samebreadth makes it difficult for many outsideobservers to, as Hartman (1994, p. 14) puts it, dis-tinguish a common thread that typifies the coreof social work. Hartman writes (p. 13),

Social work includes a broad and varied arrayof activities and is practiced with differentsize systems and in a variety of arenas. Thereis scant agreement in the field on the world-view, epistemology, or even on the principles

01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

or shape of practice. Volumes have beenpublished on the different models (Turner1986, Dorfman 1988) and some have con-cluded that the only common thread thatruns through all of social work is a sharedvalue stance (NASW 1981).

The 1990s saw the publication of several textsthat provided an overview of social work aroundthe world by presenting chapters on social workin various specific countries. (See, for example,Hokenstad, Khinduka, and Midgley 1992, andMayadas, Watts, and Elliott, 1997.) These textsmake very interesting reading, highlightingmajor differences in, to use Elliott’s analy-sis (p. 441), the ways in which social work is“socially constructed” in various parts of theworld. As one reflects on the reported differ-ences in the predominant forms that social workhas adopted in various regions and countries,one may well wonder whether this diversity canmeaningfully be seen as different expressions ofone and the same profession. It is said, for exam-ple, that “the individual paradigm is stronglyrepresented in American social work” (Elliott,p. 441); that in China the focus is on the mobi-lization of the masses to address social problems(Chow, 1997); that in Latin America social workpresents a strong emphasis on social justice and

social action (Kendall, 2000, pp. 107–8); andthat in Africa there is an increasing emphasis onsocial development as defined by, for example,the UNDP (United Nations DevelopmentProgramme) (Healy 2001, p. 102); while therebirth of social work in Eastern Europe since1990 has seen a strong emphasis on social recon-struction or the building of civil society(Constable and Mehta, 1994).

While it has been common in the literature tohighlight some dominant forms adopted bysocial work in specific countries, a closer analysisreveals that, in virtually all countries, there existsa range of sometimes competing and sometimescomplementary forms of social work—a rangethat is commonly expanding as social work agen-cies and practitioners venture into new fieldsof practice as an ever widening range of socialproblems is recognized. All such developments,however, add to the difficulty, even for socialworkers, of defining social work, and ofnon–social workers perceiving a common threadrunning through the diverse approaches thatconstitute contemporary social work globally.

At the international level, social work hasstriven, since at least the 1970s, to define itself asa global profession and to agree internationallyon a common code of ethics. The foreword tothe international code developed by the IFSW

2——INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL WORK

Learning Objectives

The main objective of this chapter is to provide a broad introduction to social work and todiscuss the concept of international social work. After studying this chapter, readers shouldbe able to reflect on

• Widely agreed definitions of social work, unique features of social work in some countries,origin of professional social work in the west and its expansion through colonization, andindigenous social work in developing countries.

• Some recent trends and critical issues in social work that are of relevance to internationalsocial work.

• Global social work organizations.

• The definition and scope of international social work.

01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

(International Federation of Social Workers)and adopted at its general meeting in PuertoRico in 1976 states,

Social work originates variously from humani-tarian, religious, and democratic ideals andphilosophies and has universal applicationto meet human needs arising from personal-societal interactions and to develop humanpotential. Professional social workers arededicated to service for the welfare andself-fulfillment of human beings; to the devel-opment and disciplined use of scientific knowl-edge regarding human and societal behavior; tothe development of resources to meet individ-ual, group, national and international needsand aspirations; and to the achievement ofsocial justice. (quoted in Alexander, 1982, p. 47)

At its general meeting in 2004, the IFSW andIASSW (International Association of Schools ofSocial Work) approved the following definitionof social work:

The social work profession promotes socialchange, problem solving in human relation-ships and the empowerment and liberationof people to enhance well-being. Utilizingtheories of human behaviour and social sys-tems, social work intervenes at the pointswhere people interact with their environ-ments. Principles of human rights and socialjustice are fundamental to social work (IFSWand IASSW, 2004).

Given that professional social work has beenguided by developments in the United Statesmore than anywhere else, it is appropriate toconsider here a recent definition of social workin the United States:

Social work is the applied science of helpingpeople achieve an effective level of psychoso-cial functioning and effecting societal changesto enhance the well-being of all people.(Barker, 1999, p. 433)

It is important that the profession is able topresent to the outside world an understandingof its core nature, and of the relevance of thatcore nature to the fields of work on which theinternational community is focused and withwhich the developing countries are concerned.At the same time, it is important that the profes-sion remains flexible, and is able to adapt itselfto changing conditions and needs either as theworld changes or as the profession moves intonew environments. It would indeed be amazing,and reflect poorly on the profession, if socialwork did not present many different faces glob-ally, given the wide range of national and localconditions to which it is called upon to respond.Nor does the presenting diversity represent asource of division within the profession. Theonly concern is that the diverse nature of socialwork sometimes results in non–social workersfailing to appreciate the full nature of socialwork, and perceiving social work, whether posi-tively or negatively, in terms of only one of itsmany faces.

The Global Spread andOrganization of Social Work

The history of social work reveals its links withsocial welfare and social development, with otherprofessions such as medicine, and with the char-itable movement that emerged in the nineteenthcentury. This history has been explored by arange of writers (e.g., Kendall, 2000) and requiresin this context little more than a summary of themajor points.

Professional SocialWork’s Western Origins

It is generally agreed that social work grewout of the urban destitution that characterizedpost–Industrial Revolution England and the gov-ernment’s response to this situation through relieffor the poor. As Midgley (1981, p. 17) puts it,

International Social Work——3

01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

As the rural poor were drawn into and concen-trated in the industrialising cities during thenineteenth century, the problem of urban des-titution became more acute and conventionalpublic poor relief provisions were strained;social work attempted to provide an alternativewhich would lessen the burden of public assis-tance borne by taxpayers, be more humane andseek to rehabilitate the destitute.

A large number of charitable organizationsemerged in the United Kingdom and continen-tal Europe, and subsequently in the UnitedStates and elsewhere (e.g., Australia), and thesehad an enormous influence on the profession’sdevelopment. Their emergence led in particularto the profession’s focus on social casework.

The conditions in the newly emergingcities gave rise also to the settlement movement,designed to bring the middle classes into contactwith those in poor urban areas and, through thecross-class contacts that occurred and the recre-ational and educational activities that werearranged, to “inculcate moral values and reformthe habits of slum dwellers,” as Midgley (1981,p. 22) describes the goals. This settlement workcan be seen as one important set of roots for theprofession’s embrace of community work, for itadvocated community-based responses to socialproblems and social reforms. (Leighninger andMidgley, 1997, p. 10) describe this settlementmovement as it emerged in the United States,showing how it led the emerging professionto focus on the causes of social problems andexplore responses to them at both a governmentpolicy and a community level.

Leighninger and Midgley (1997, p. 11) pro-vide a succinct summary of the impact of thisearly history on the social work profession:

Individualist approaches, social reformmovements, and the growth of public socialservices have all played a role in social work’sdevelopment. The profession’s leaders wereable to amalgamate individually focused

treatment, organized group pursuits, com-munity activism, social reform, and otheractivities into a loosely defined practicemethodology which formed the basis ofsocial work’s professional identity.

This shows why casework, community work,and group work were all important to this earlydevelopment.

In the following decades, the fledgling profes-sion was to broaden considerably in response toother developments in its environment, espe-cially in the United Kingdom and United States.For example, developments in the field of lawand order resulted in a focus on young offendersand the establishment of a probation servicein which social work would play a leading role.Similarly, developments in the health field led tothe emergence of hospital social work and latera strong emphasis on psychiatric social work.Indeed, the medical model had a significantimpact on social work in the late nineteenth andearly twentieth centuries, and psychiatric socialwork, according to Midgley (1981, p. 29), wasboosted by the frequent use of social workers inwork with shell-shocked patients during WorldWar I.

The development of social work educationclosely reflected the above historical roots. Itbegan usually with in-service training for vari-ous areas of work, established initially by eitherprivate societies or government departments,depending on where the majority of workerswere employed. Then over the years these train-ing courses were moved into the educationalinstitutions, and particularly universities. Thecurricula taught initially reflected the prevailingpractice contexts; however, eventually theycame to incorporate the breadth of social workactivities that emerged, including new bodies ofknowledge and new practice methodologies.

We have referred so far mainly to develop-ments in the United Kingdom and UnitedStates, and these two countries certainly led inthe emergence of professional social work. The


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

situation on the European continent, asRowlings (1997) points out, was and is highlyvaried and often in marked contrast to that ofthe United Kingdom and United States. Rowlingscomments,

Europe incorporates multiple and variedstructures through which social work andsocial welfare services are delivered. Thesereflect very different views on the role ofthe state in the direct or indirect provision ofwelfare and on the responsibility of thefamily, and more particularly of women, forthe survival and well-being of dependentfamily members (p. 114).

The writer goes on to contrast north andsouth Europe, there being a long-establishedtradition of state delivery of welfare services inthe north, mostly through local governmentstructures, while in much of southern Europethere was no tradition of active state involve-ment in welfare. However, whatever the localtradition historically, a mixed welfare system hasnow emerged or is emerging in most of Europe,influenced most recently by the social policies ofthe European Union.

These differing welfare structures acrossEurope have resulted in significant differences insocial work, including in its definition. Rowlingsexplains that in France, for example, “socialwork” is a collective term covering eight or nineoccupational groups usually regarded elsewhereas paraprofessional groupings. By contrast, inGermany the term “has the narrower meaningof individualized casework by workers operatingfrom local community-based offices, hospitals,clinics, or voluntary organizations” (p. 116).

This author thus points out that the parame-ters of social work vary across Europe. For exam-ple, in Sweden it does not include work witholder people but in many other countries it does.Similarly, she notes that in the United Kingdom“income support (or social assistance) is pro-vided by civil servants employed in a national

social security system,” whereas in continentalwestern Europe “qualified social workers assessand administer the benefits system” (p. 117).

Social work in Europe, while varied, does con-tain indigenous roots that reflect the peculiarculture and social structure of each state. By con-trast, the new industrialized countries, foundedby European states as colonies, tended to inherittheir social work structures along with the colo-nial social welfare system. For example, theUnited Kingdom exported its welfare system andits charitable organizations to Australia, andtraining courses were established to provide in-service training for the staff of these departmentsand organizations. The social work profession, asIfe (1997, p. 383) notes, also received significantimpetus from the medical field with “a perceivedneed for trained hospital almoners.” In addition,the ongoing development of social work wasmuch influenced by developments in the UnitedKingdom but particularly the United States, asmany social work leaders went to these countriesfor advanced education in social work. Indeed,these ties of Australian social work to the UnitedKingdom and United States have been lamentedby some observers, as having held back the emer-gence of an indigenous profession within thisand other former colonies. While most industri-alized western countries eventually broke free oftheir colonial heritage to a large degree, andbegan to forge their own indigenous approach tosocial work, they could also not avoid altogetherthe influence of their roots and the basic systemsinherited from particularly the United Kingdomand United States, nor of the ongoing develop-ments in these countries.

The Expansion of SocialWork Through Colonization

Social work accompanied colonialism essen-tially to meet the needs and aspirations of thecolonial powers, rather than to allow social workto make a contribution to these countries’ devel-opment. The colonial powers believed that they


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

were bringing these territories into the moderncivilized world, and such social welfare servicesas were established reflected this objective. Thisobjective, together with the fact that those whoadministered these services were social workersand others recruited from the home country,resulted in the imposition on these lands of ausually rudimentary western welfare systemstaffed, or at least administered, largely by west-erners. For the most part, the emphasis was onhealth, education, and law and order, especially inurban areas, but often confined to the supportand protection of those classes whose roles wereimportant to the colonial system, with the needsof many others ignored except where Christian orhumanitarian motivated services reached out,more often than not to civilize and Christianizerather than meet welfare, let alone development,needs (see Hoogvelt, 2001, p. 20).

In a number of colonies, social welfare andcommunity development training courses wereintroduced as more and more local people wererecruited to staff the developing social services.To some extent these early training coursesformed a basis for the establishment of modernsocial work, although it is also true that whenmodern social work per se was introduced,usually after independence had been obtained, itrepresented to some degree a new import fromthe West with American schools and trainingmodels often used as the models for these devel-opments (Midgley, 1981, pp. 56ff.). As Midgleypoints out, the UN also took a strong interestin the establishment of professional social workin developing countries in the 1950s and 1960s,as too did a number of social work professionalsfrom the Western world who initiated many newdevelopments. Inevitably the schools of socialwork established in this period had to drawheavily on expatriates as teachers, who invari-ably taught according to the models and curric-ula with which they were familiar. Midgley(1981, p. 60) comments,

To promote ‘modern’ social work, westernsocial work experts used as models the

approaches to social work education whichhad developed in their own countries.Motivated by the demands of modernization,they designed curricula which replicatedthe content of western social work training,urged that social work courses be establishedin universities and recommended the adop-tion of western professional standards.

Although Midgley argues that even thosecountries that were not colonized were affectedby colonialism, the reality is that a number ofdeveloping countries, including many thatwere later designated by the UN as the LeastDeveloped Countries (LDCs), did not establisheither state-run social services or modern socialwork, despite the presence in most of these coun-tries of some international agencies providing arange of services through largely expatriate staff.The absence of the colonial powers from thesecountries, as well as their extremely slow devel-opment process, are presumably reasons whymost of these countries still lack professionalsocial work, in terms of modern social work edu-cation and associations of social workers. Whilecolonialism involved imposing a western stampon early social work developments in the devel-oping world, it at least laid some foundations formodern social welfare and social work develop-ments. It is a matter of judgment whether thiswestern stamp was overall negative or positive.On the one hand, it resulted in what were oftenperceived to be inappropriate forms of socialwork education and practice; on the other hand,in many of those countries without any directcolonial influence, social work had not devel-oped roots at all, despite the existence of envi-ronments that required initiatives along socialwork lines. The one situation cried out forreform; while the other situation awaited theintroduction of appropriate social work systems.

The above discussion suggests that the ori-gins of modern social work were everywherevery similar. This in fact is not the full story.Whether in response to local circumstances or,more likely, reflecting the priorities of influential


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

parties, social work emerged in the variouscountries with somewhat distinctive priorities.In India, for example, industrial social work hasthrived from an early stage (Bose, 1992, p. 75).

Regarding such developments, Pawar (1999)has noted that social work programs possessinga labor market specialization tend to producetwo cadres of personnel with opposing interests.On the one hand there are the labor welfare andpersonnel management graduates who identifywith management; on the other hand, there arethe social workers who focus on the labor force.

Regarding Egypt, Abo-El-Nasr (1997, p. 206)notes that “the keynote of the early practice ofsocial work in Egypt was in two fields: commu-nity development projects in rural areas andschools in urban areas.” This author sees socialwork “as an adjunct or auxiliary to the achieve-ment of the primary organizational goals ofeducation, medicine, and production.” Egyptis thus also another of the few countries whereindustrial social work has flourished.

In a case study of social work in thePhilippines, Midgley (1981, p. 58) points outthat there the Department of Social Welfare wasthe major employer of social workers, and thatit “was concerned chiefly . . . ‘with the welfareof the handicapped, the unwanted and theunloved, like the orphans and waifs who eitherran away from home or were turned out by theirparents.’” Hence “child care was among the firstresponsibilities assumed by public welfareservices in the Philippines.” Midgley goes on toexplain that social work in the Philippinesadopted casework methods as its major thrust,was very urban-oriented, and thus in these earlystages lacked relevance to the (developmentaland rural) needs of the Philippines.

Thus a closer study of the emergence of socialwork in the developing world indicates that,while the influences of colonialism and of theWestern world generally were commonly ofgreat importance, the precise nature of thefledgling profession in the various countries orregions was not identical, in part because theirsociocultural and political economy contexts

were different. It further indicates that theseearly priorities in the functions and practice ofsocial work have usually had an ongoing influ-ence on the profession’s image and subsequentdevelopment in the various countries. (Forexamples of this diversity, see Hokenstad et al.,1992, and Mayadas et al., 1997.)

The Focus on Indigenous SocialWork in Developing Countries

Reading reports on social work around theworld today reveals a consensus between writerson a number of points. First, it is clear thatorganized professional social work exists tovarying degrees in the majority of countries(many LDCs being the exception), and that thevarious national social work structures recog-nize each other as sharing much in commonand as being part of a global profession. Second,social work everywhere shares the same ethicalunderpinnings, as revealed not only in jointethical statements but also in shared concerns.Third, there is a strong sense that “social work-ers are coping with similar social problems inmany if not most countries” (Healy, 2001,p. 100), and the programs and discussions atinternational social work conferences drivehome this point. Fourth, social work almosteverywhere in the developing world shares asense of possessing a low status among theprofessions, seemingly due to common imagesof what social work is and does—images thatoften, unfortunately, contain a degree of accu-racy regarding social work in that country,although not globally. Finally, there is a widelyheld fear in many developed countries thatsocial work is in several specific types of danger,especially those of merging with the bureau-cracy; moving extensively into private practice,becoming the servant of government throughits role in the trend to contract services out, andof weakening along with the so-called demise ofthe welfare state and formal welfare structuresas part of the application of neoliberal ideology(see Pierson, 1998; Hutton, 2003).


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

While there is agreement that social workaround the world shares much in common,some writers also recognize the existence ofsignificant differences. At one level these differ-ences are those that could be anticipated withinany global profession—differences from coun-try to country in emphases, in the strength ofthe profession, and in the details of professionaleducation and practice, reflecting in large partthe sociocultural-economic differences in pre-vailing environments but also historical factors.At another and far more significant level are thedifferences that reflect the profession’s specificregional, national, and local responses to chang-ing need profiles, changing resource issuesnecessitating changes in prevailing methodo-logies, and so on. These changes, as they occur inparticular places, can begin to change the face ofthe profession quite markedly; however, suchchanges tend to occur slowly and initially onlywithin small sections of, or even on the marginsof, the overall profession.

It is clear that in Latin America, for example,social work has been influenced in places, andto some degree overall, by liberation theologyadopted by sections of the Catholic Church andthe conscientization (consciousness-raising) focusof Paulo Freire (1972), resulting in a strong socialjustice and social action focus and a commitmentto revolutionary change (Kendall, 2000, pp. 107-8).In many parts of Africa, as a second example,social work has been strongly influenced byrecent social development thinking, and socialworkers have been actively promoting a socialdevelopment perspective within the profession.(see Healy, 2001, p. 102; Journal of SocialDevelopment in Africa.) As a third example, inparts of India, there has in recent times been astrong focus on rural social work, involving therecruitment of rural students to study in newrural-oriented schools of social work and to goon to practice rural social work. Another exampleis the People’s Republic of China, where the intro-duction of professional social work from the Westhas been resisted because it does not dovetail withChinese cultural values and practices. Indeed, in

most regions the need for culturally sensitivesocial work education and practice is increasinglyrecognized by those who are involved at grass-roots levels.

Finally, the birth or rebirth of social work inEastern Europe in the aftermath of the end ofthe Cold War (1989), and the collapse of com-munist and socialist regimes that followed, hasseen a strong emphasis on social reconstruc-tion or, as some express it, the building of civilsociety (the network of organizations that medi-ate between the people and state political andeconomic structures). This has often been seenas an essential first step to many other necessarydevelopments (see Constable and Mehta, 1994).However, in all of the above examples, except forthe last one perhaps, these distinctive character-istics exist alongside a set of mainstream socialwork characteristics that have not changedgreatly over recent decades. While they aresignificant and interesting developments, theyremain in a sense marginal.

In such examples, social work is changing,albeit often slowly, as a result of a critical exam-ination of its roles in the light of recent devel-opments. While change has, to some extent,been endemic to social work since the outset,these recent changes are quite radical and couldresult in major changes to the overall professionin the long term. Whether these changes willresult in a broadening of the profession undercommon professional auspices, or a splitting ofthe profession into various schools such as theclinical and social development approaches,only time will tell. We believe, however, thatthese new emphases are timely if social work isto retain its integrity, be true to its value base,and play a worthwhile role in the major chal-lenges confronting the contemporary world. Toa very large degree those people driving suchchanges are doing what Midgley (1981, p. 157)said was required to modify the welfareapproach, which included wrong priorities andinappropriate structures introduced from theWest: “Solutions to these problems can befound only if social workers attempt to identify


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

and rectify inappropriate forms of social workeducation and practice in their own countries.”Gradually solutions are being found, usually byexpanding the breadth of social work, althoughit is probably true to say that the process is stillin its infancy.

An article that exemplifies many of the abovepoints in the African context is that of Osei-Hwedie (1993). This writer is concerned aboutthe gap between western theory, especially socialscience theory, and social work practice inAfrica. He suggests that the indigenization ofsocial work in Africa “must start from within,determine what our problems and requirementsare, what resources and skills are available tous and what processes and procedures we canborrow from others” (p. 22). He argues that itmay be necessary to redefine social work “in thecontext of social development and social devel-opment concerns” (p. 23). He continues, using aline of argument that can be applied in much ofthe developing world:

Increasing social work effectiveness in Africameans perfecting the professional expertise, andestablishing greater legitimacy and societalacceptability. The struggle to define social workand charter its course also involves the issue ofcontrol. It is a struggle about who defines andcontrols the profession and therefore assignsits socioeconomic status. By necessity whoeverdefines the field must also set the agenda. Amajor problem is that the social work agenda isset by other people, especially politicians, andthat to a large extent, social work training is dic-tated by the nature of employment, in almost allcases, as offered by government and nongovern-ment organizations. Once again, indigenizationof the field must resolve the question of who setsthe agenda, and remove the content of practicefrom the political to the professional arena.

Finally, Osei-Hwedi (1993, p. 27) charts thedifficult road ahead for social work:

The profession must . . . locate the basis ofthe profession and its rationale; develop aprocess which enables refined knowledge and

skills to emerge out of practice; define socialwork and its mission to capture the Africanworld view; clarify the domain and expertiseof social work; and identify the knowledge,philosophy and value bases of the profession.

The processes either of adapting inheritedwestern social work knowledge and skills to localsituations, or of devising an indigenous form ofsocial work from scratch drawing on externaland local expertise, are by no means easy for any-one, and especially for social work leaders in thepoorer developing countries. This is an area withwhich the global profession should be preparedto assist. In relation to the first situation, Pawar(1999) has suggested ten steps for developingindigenous social work education:

1. acceptance by social work educators ofthe fact that they are teaching a westernsocial work model, resulting in

2. a questioning of the model and the localrelevance of the various subjects andspecializations;

3. identifying what is and is not relevantand why;

4. identifying the various factors, condi-tions, and circumstances that result inaspects of the model being irrelevant;

5. discovering solutions, perceptions, andcoping strategies that exist within localculture, traditions, and practices;

6. documenting these and incorporatingthem into classroom teaching and fieldeducation;

7. undertaking a micro level series ofexercises that will facilitate the develop-ment of indigenous curricula;

8. documenting and disseminating effec-tive social work practices;

9. revising subject curricula to incorporatethe above; and


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

10. organizing curriculum developmentworkshops at the school level, involvingeducators, practitioners, and students;and later at interschool levels.

Given the focus of this text on the developingworld, we have referred only to the indige-nization of social work in developing countries,seemingly implying that this trend has norelevance for western industrialized countries.Such, however, is not the case. Although it is notappropriate to detail these developments here, itshould be noted that social work in several west-ern countries has identified the importance ofdeveloping forms of indigenous social work inrelation to various local situations. One exampleis in the field of social work among indigenousminorities, where work has been proceeding inat least Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and theUnited States.

Recent Trends inSocial Work of Relevance toInternational Social Work

It can be said that, over its long history, socialwork has evolved to serve three major areas ofpractice.

The first area sees social work as an arm of thewelfare state. Within this area, the state effectivelydictates the specific fields of practice on whichthe profession focuses, and the majority of socialworkers are either employed directly by the stateor by agencies that are funded, and thereforeeffectively controlled, by the state. This area ofpractice includes the following specific fields ofwork: work with juvenile delinquents and adultcriminals through, for example, probation andparole work and working within correctionalinstitutions; family welfare services; work in thechild protection and child adoption fields; andwork in the fields of social security, family assis-tance, and similar welfare and assistance schemes.There are strong elements of social control andprotection in this general area.

The second area sees social work as commit-ted to enhancing the social functioning or well-being of individuals and families by workingdirectly with clients experiencing problems. Thisarea of practice has had several offshoots,including clinical social work, family therapyand marriage guidance, medical and psychiatricsocial work, and work within the so-called psy-chotherapies. In this area of social work, workersare very much serving individual people whobecome their clients, epitomized in its extremeform by private practice. However, it also coverspractice in state and private institutional set-tings, such as, for example, hospitals.

The third area of social work sees the profes-sion as seeking to contribute to the building ofhealthy, cohesive, and enabling communitiesand societies, and by this process promoting thewell-being of people. The fields of practice inthis area range from community development tomacro social policy formulation, and can todaybe summarized perhaps as social development:the basic goals are always related to improvingthe environments or societies within whichpeople develop and live. Here social work is tosome degree the servant of the people withinselected contexts, including communities andpopulation groupings such as ethnic groups,regions, and nations, but it also reflects the pro-fession’s mission to contribute to the building ofa better world at various levels. The majority ofsocial workers employed in this area work forthe agencies of civil society, although somewill work for the state, especially in the fields ofsocial administration, social policy, and state-devised community development or socialdevelopment programs, but with goals similar tothe goals of those working within civil society.

Throughout the history of social work,questions have periodically arisen about thevalidity of these three areas and the nature of thebalance between them. Let us consider how suchquestions have been answered in recent times. Weshall see that the criticisms leveled at the profes-sion, most frequently from within its own ranks,


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

are of three types. There are those who criticizethe balance within the profession between thethree areas specified above, however these areasare delineated. Secondly, there are those who crit-icize the profession for effectively neglecting cer-tain fields of practice altogether, and the fieldsreferred to lie mainly within the third areaoutlined—the area which can be referred to associal development. Finally, there are those whocriticize the profession for ignoring selected pop-ulation sectors altogether, which means that allthree areas of practice delineated above are notapplied to any significant degree to designatedpopulation groupings. Let us consider these threetypes of criticisms in more detail.

The Question of BalanceBetween the Three Areas of Practice

The criticism that the profession is unbal-anced in the selection of the areas of educationand practice on which it focuses takes differentforms in different countries, reflecting the factthat the actual balance between the three areasvaries significantly from country to country. TheUnited States is a nation where some believe thatsocial work has focused excessively on the areaof micro practice with individuals and families,utilizing a largely clinical model in its practiceacross this area. In 1990, Specht (1990, p. 345)warned, “As things currently stand, there is goodreason to expect that the profession will beentirely engulfed by psychotherapy within thenext 20 years, and social work’s function in thepublic social services will become negligible.” Inconclusion, Specht (1990, p. 354) writes, “Thecentral point of this article is that the psy-chotherapies have diverted social work from itsoriginal vision, a vision of the perfectibility ofsociety, the building of the ‘city beautiful,’ the‘new society,’ and the ‘new frontier.’”

Writing about social work in the UnitedKingdom, Harris (1990, pp. 204–205) criticizeswhat he regards as an unacceptable imbalance,albeit a different imbalance to that perceived by

Specht as applying to social work in the UnitedStates. Harris writes in a critical tone,

In the United Kingdom the debate about“what is social work?” has for many yearsbeen a central existential concern. It is vari-ously answered. My own view is that it is inessence a state-funded activity concerned todeal individually with a range of “hard cases”in relation to which the routine applicationof the rules and law and policy are wanting:social work enforces rights which have notbeen elsewhere enforced and duties whichthe social worker’s clientele have abrogated:social work is, therefore, a state-centred, not aclient-centred enterprise. . . .

Finally, writing out of the African context,Kaseke (1990, p. 19) reflects a common Africanview that social work has been too preoccupiedon that continent with state welfare and reme-dial approaches and too little with the socialdevelopment field. He writes,

Social development has evolved out ofthe frustration of social workers operatingwithin the framework of the remedialapproach. Their impressive interventionskills at the micro level have not helped toprovide a permanent solution to problemswhich continue to resurface in dimensionsmuch beyond the capacity of social workerswith their current operational parameters.

Mupedziswa (1992) shares this view. He writes,

The problems raised in this paper [unemploy-ment, refugees, AIDS, ecology and structuraladjustment programs] are major challengesfor the social work profession. There is needfor the social work profession to adopt whatAnkrah (1987) has termed a “futuristic orien-tation”, that is to anticipate what human needsare likely to be and what conditions willensure that these are met, if social work hopes


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

to get on top of the situation. The professionjust must become more aggressive, and moreadventurous, if it is to be taken seriously andindeed if it is to become more relevant. (p. 29)

Most writers on social work across Africadiscuss the variety of influences on and emerg-ing forms of the profession, alongside manyattempts at indigenization (see Asamoah, 1997),and go on to conclude that the indigenizationprocess must be taken further and that socialwork must become more responsive to themajor problems confronting the continent byadopting a largely developmental approach.(See, for example, Osei-Hwedie, 1993.)

The Neglect of CertainFields of Practice andCertain Population Groupings

The second criticism of contemporary socialwork that is frequently encountered is that ittends to ignore or neglect certain vital issues orareas of need. Lobo and Mayadas (1997) describethe emerging model of social work within thefield of work with refugees and displaced personsas a major challenge for international social work,while implying that this field is not significantlyaddressed by the profession. Back in 1982, andthese views are probably still accurate, Sanderswrote that “the refugee problem and the unprece-dented involuntary movement of people acrossnational borders is a challenge to the conscienceof the international community and the socialwork profession.” Another issue that Sanders(1985 and 1988) and others often wrote andspoke about was peace, emphasizing that peaceand social development issues were closely relatedand should constitute social work concerns.

Other writers have lamented social work’seffective neglect of extreme poverty in develop-ing countries. Gore (1988, p. 3) writes of the sit-uation in India, “It is often said in criticism ofsocial work in India that the professional socialworkers address themselves to the consequences

of poverty—such as destitution, lack of shelter,broken family, delinquency—rather than topoverty itself.”

This is a fairly common view across thedeveloping world. In developing countries,writers tend to refer to all major development-related needs, including poverty, as in practiceeffectively lying outside the usual scope of socialwork practice. They lament, for example, theneglect of rural areas, child labor, street children,migrant workers, illiteracy among and discrimi-nation against women, and other fields. Usuallythe reasons stated or implied include that thestate welfare system has not ventured into theseareas and that aid agencies will not readily fundprojects in such areas. Other reasons, however,relate to the urban and middle-class nature ofthe social work profession and the tendency ofits graduates to choose other more acceptableand easier or more comfortable fields of practiceover these neglected ones. Finally, social work insome developing countries is criticized asneglecting the field of social policy.

Allied to the criticized tendency of social workto avoid selected issues or fields is the criticismthat it effectively turns its back on certain popu-lations—usually populations that constituteunpopular minority groups within a state. Thecriticism is made of social work’s role amongindigenous minorities in most countries, amongthe Gypsy or Roma population of Europe, amongasylum seekers and illegal migrants in somecountries, and among certain castes in India.Frequently the view is put that the only way torectify this situation is for schools of social workto adopt a policy of positive discrimination,selecting students from such backgrounds, andincorporating relevant material in the curriculum.While admirable in some senses, there are alsodangers in such a policy, especially that of relegat-ing a massive set of problems to a handful ofgraduates from a specific background. Of courseone can explain an absence of social work servicesin certain contexts as simply reflecting a lack ofemployment opportunities and funding, but we


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

believe the reasons to be more complex than thisand have much to do with perceptions of main-stream social work in some countries, within andoutside the profession.

Factors That Influence the Choiceof the Three Areas of Practice andthe Balance Between Them

Complexity of Factors

We have discussed this topic largely as if itwere a matter of worker preference as to wheresocial workers practice, and that their choicestend to reflect attitudes within the profession asmuch as personal preferences. The question ofwhat determines social work deployment pat-terns is in reality quite complex. It involves thebackgrounds and motivations of those whoapply for and are accepted into schools of socialwork, and that population today in developingcountries is usually a biased one favoring well-educated, urban middle-class persons. It involvesthe values, curriculum, staff profile, and otherfactors pertaining to the social work schools, forspecific types of schools and curricula attractspecific types of students, and in turn influencethe employment preferences of graduates. Itinvolves the employment market, for mostpersons will not choose to study particularemphases of a profession if the employmentopportunities do not exist. It involves commu-nity attitudes prevailing among governmentpersonnel who make decisions about education,and among education administrators, educa-tion funding bodies, and parents of potentialstudents, as well as in the range of governmentand nongovernment welfare services. If commu-nity values and attitudes are strongly against cer-tain fields of practice or certain potential targetpopulations, it is unlikely that courses, staff, orstudents will embrace those fields of practice toany significant degree. In such situations, it isoften left to a handful of individuals or agenciesto pioneer social work practice in unpopular

areas, with the hope that they might eventuallydemonstrate the efficacy and necessity of suchwork.

Local Issues, Needs, and Contexts

A major difficulty may seem to be that mostof those commentators who criticize the balancewithin or coverage of social work are not recom-mending that any areas or fields be dropped.They are usually not against what most socialworkers do but would like to see the scope oftheir reach expanded. Indeed, those who analyzethe situation closely are disinclined to focusexcessively on the differences between the areasof practice because they are aware of the largeand necessary degree of overlap. For example,those who support a strong social developmentfocus commonly do not exclude casework fromsuch a focus, and certainly embrace both state-based and civil society–based intervention pro-grams. The problem that then emerges is that ofconstantly expanding the areas or fields of prac-tice, within an already overloaded curriculumand possibly an overstretched profession.

However, while few may wish to move socialwork out of any fields of activity, it is importantin every profession to allow an assessment of theprevailing situation to determine issues like thebalance between various areas of practice. It isclearly unacceptable that social work in Africa,to take but one example, should focus exces-sively on either the area of casework or that ofsocial control measures initiated by govern-ments. While both areas of practice have theirplace and generate skills that have wider applic-ability, social work in Africa should focuspredominantly on addressing those needs thatafflict the great majority of the population andcause widespread suffering, such as poverty,HIV/AIDS and low levels of social development.Hence the call for a social development focusin many African countries and elsewhere wouldseem a completely logical decision for socialwork to make in that context.


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

The Need for a Comprehensiveand Integrated Response

An alternative to expanding the scope of socialwork may be seen to be the development of newprofessions, such as social development workers,conflict and trauma counselors, and peace workersengaged in community reconciliation. We would,however, argue strongly against such a response.The reality is that need is holistic, and that persons,families, communities, regions, and even statesmust to a large degree be perceived as integratedwholes. The range of needs will vary, and specialistintervention will often be necessary, but it willalways be important that there are those profes-sionals who are able to see, understand, and assessthe wider picture, and then work to ensure that theoverall response to the overall situation is bothcomprehensive and integrated. This is indeed oneof the major lessons to emerge from social workgenerally and social development work to date.

Let us take an example. If one works ina country that has been through a period ofconflict, it is very obvious that workers are con-fronted with a range of interacting needs includ-ing, for example, needs to achieve reconciliationbetween parties to the conflict, to reintegratereturning displaced persons, to assist those whohave been traumatized by events, to help com-munities to reestablish and work together, tobuild income-generation opportunities while dis-tributing aid as necessary, to reconstruct societyfrom the state institutions down to the local level,and to assist individuals with personal needsranging from medical to marital problems. Whileinevitably some agencies and workers will befocusing on but one of these areas, there is theneed for workers who can appreciate the largerpicture; develop and implement a comprehensiveset of policies and programs; deploy, support andcoordinate specialist workers; and generallyensure that developments in any one area willcomplement those in other areas so that people’swell-being as a whole and the future developmentof the country are ensured.

Levels of Deploymentof Social Workers

This perception of the need for a comprehen-sive and integrated approach to situations ofpoverty and displacement, postconflict situa-tions, and social development generally, imme-diately suggests the importance of workersoperating at different levels. A critical problemfor social work in many contexts internationally,we believe, is its focus largely on the one level –that of the university graduate professionalsocial worker. In some countries, we see theemployment of welfare workers at a level belowgraduate social workers, and social administra-tors and supervisors at a level above, but usuallywith clear demarcations between roles and lev-els. The difficulties encountered with the onegraduate level model are several: the educationis expensive for all parties; in developing coun-tries it results in relatively small graduate num-bers; graduates expect to be paid well and toenjoy relatively good working conditions;and graduate profiles reflect the educationlevel, being commonly predominantly urbanmiddle-class.

The work situation, by contrast with the pre-vailing model, suggests the need for at least threelevels of worker, and hence of training. Anyefforts to alleviate poverty, tackle local-leveldevelopment, engage with large populations ofdisplaced persons, or embark on postconflictreconstruction will require very large numbers ofworkers able and willing to work in frontlineoperations with often difficult work environ-ments. The training of these personnel can be,however, relatively short and limited to selectedwork roles, provided that adequate supervision ismade available. A second level required is that ofworkers who can devise and implement localprograms; train, supervise and support frontlineworkers; and interact with broader levels ofsociety as necessary. Numbers at this level willneed to be considerable, although much lessthan the numbers of frontline workers, while the


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

complexity of the work calls for a basic universityeducation. Finally, there is a need for workerswith advanced training able to work effectively atthe macro policy and planning levels, relate localprograms to the broader societal situation, par-ticipate in the education of the second level ofworkers, prepare materials for use in the field,and otherwise facilitate a comprehensive andintegrated approach to presenting situations.

We can refer to the three levels outlined invarious ways. They can be seen as the local,intermediate, and central levels of operation; orthe three levels of graduates can be described associal work assistants, social workers, andsenior social workers; or alternatively, they canbe regarded as paraprofessionals, professionals,and senior professionals. The terminology isnot as important as is the acceptance of thethree basic levels to implementing a compre-hensive strategy in responding to presentingnational and international needs. We wouldalso argue that it is important that the three lev-els are all levels within the profession of socialwork with articulation from one level to thenext well provided for, and that the training andnumbers trained at each level reflect prevailingrequirements at the three levels. It should benoted that we are not alone in reaching thisconclusion. For example, Constable and Mehta(1995, p. 117), in concluding a study of socialwork education in Eastern Europe, argue theoverall need for four levels, namely, in theirterms: paraprofessional auxiliary level, firstdiploma level, second diploma level, and doc-toral level. It has been pointed out to us bysocial workers in Hong Kong that they havelong utilized a clearly delineated three tier sys-tem, while a de facto three tier system can beseen as operating in many western countries,whether or not workers at all levels and the pro-fession consciously endorse this situation. (Thistopic is developed further in Chapter 14.)

In conclusion, it seems to us that social workhas the responsibility and the potential torespond to the various situations of need that

have dominated the international scene inrecent times. Furthermore, we would stronglysupport the focus of social work simultaneouslyon the three areas that can be described as sup-porting the welfare state, providing caseworkservices to community members in need ofsuch, and engaging in social development as wehave defined it (see Chapter 2). However, thebalance between these three areas should varyfrom country to country, reflecting the balancebetween presenting needs and commonlyagreed-upon responses to meeting those needs.Clearly, therefore, schools of social work inter-nationally should be encouraged to reflect allthree areas in the curriculum offered to students(although individual schools may reflect thethree areas in different ways, perhaps comple-menting each other).

Furthermore, the need for social workers tocontribute at the three levels, which we mightrefer to as local, intermediate, and central,necessitates the basic division of the professioninto the three levels of assistant social workers,social workers, and senior social workers, withlevels of entry to the profession and educationand training offered reflecting these three levelsof work in the field. In addition, the numericalbalance between the three levels of recruitmentand education will reflect the socioeconomicand development realities and need profilesprevailing in any country or region. We reachthese conclusions from our examination ofinternational social work. We cannot see howsocial work can make a significant response tothe several aspects of international social workcanvassed in this text unless these changes tothe prevailing situation in the profession aremade. Moreover, we believe that the professionis capable of undergoing change and agree withKendall (2000, p. 107) when she writes, “Itappears to be true that social work, perhapsmore than any of the professions, is necessarilyresponsive to the social, political, economic andcultural conditions of the countries in which itis practiced.”


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

The “Professionalization”of Social Work

A core problem concerning the “professional-ization” of social work in the developing countrycontext was set out by Midgley as early as 1981.He wrote,

Because schools of social work in the UnitedStates and Britain were established at univer-sities, it was recommended that social worktraining in the Third World should be intro-duced at the same level. In some countries,where there is a surplus of graduates, univer-sity trained social workers are employed asfield workers but in many others, where auniversity education holds the prospect ofrapid promotion, graduates are not eager tobegin their careers at field level positions andare especially anxious to avoid a posting inthe rural areas. Frequently, graduates aregiven responsibility for administration forwhich they have not been trained properlyand, at the same time, inadequate trainingfacilities for field level workers are provided.(1981, p. 153)

It is clear that social work in the West hasdeliberately taken on the mantle of a profession,especially in terms of the level of educationrequired for practice, and Midgley is emphasiz-ing the inappropriateness of these educationlevels for at least some developing countries. Itis important, however, to consider the degree ofprofessionalism in the light of the roles of socialwork. Here there are two major considerations.One is that social workers exercise a significantdegree of control or influence over people’s livesand well-being, and the principle of account-ability or responsible behavior would necessi-tate that all social workers are trained to thehighest level possible. And as professional edu-cation in the Western world has become aprovince of the universities, it is appropriatethat social work education is located there

and its levels monitored closely. The secondconsideration is related to the key role of socialwork in integrating a variety of welfare ordevelopment inputs. If social workers are to beexpected to give full consideration to social,economic, political, technological, ecological,cultural, legal, and other factors, while oftencoordinating a range of inputs in any situation,the level of education needs to be at least at thelevel of these other disciplines, and possibly fora slightly longer period of education than somedisciplines. Once again, therefore, the logicimplies a tertiary level of preparation.

We would certainly want to argue that socialwork has a responsibility to be as professional aspossible, given that doing so does conform withthe important principle of accountability andensure that all practice has the potential to raiselevels of well-being to the highest possible in agiven environment. However, professionalismin social work does not necessitate a certain levelof training for all workers, or certain levels ofsalary and work conditions for that matter. Theobjective, and indeed obligation, is to provide aservice at the highest level possible in a givencontext. While that level will inevitably vary tosome degree, the existence of global guidelinesestablished by the IFSW (IASSW and ISFW,2004) is very important. The nine standardsbeing developed cover the social work school’score purpose or mission, program objectivesand outcomes, program curricula includingfield work, core curricula, professional staff,student body, structure, administration, gover-nance and resources, cultural and ethnic diver-sity and gender inclusiveness, and social valuesand ethical codes of conduct. However, wemight argue that, above all other considerations,countries’ resource levels should never precludesocial work altogether or specific levels of socialwork practice, as appears currently to occur.Rather social work should be geared to theresources available, with external supports in thecase of many LDCs. We shall return to the ques-tion in Chapter 14.


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

The Global Organizationof Social Work

As the global organization of social work willenter into our discussions at several points, itwill be helpful to present a brief overview of this.The three main international social work orga-nizations were all in effect founded in the late1920s, all emerging out of an international con-ference on social work in Paris in 1928. TheInternational Conference on Social Work, thepredecessor of the International Council onSocial Welfare (ICSW), and the InternationalPermanent Secretariat of Social Workers, thepredecessor of the International Federation ofSocial Workers (IFSW), were both founded in1928, and the International Association ofSchools of Social Work (IASSW) in 1929. Thesethree international organizations continue to bethe key global organizations uniting social workinternationally, although each has over the yearsevolved distinctive roles. Other internationalorganizations have been field-specific in nature(for example, in the fields of aging and childwelfare), but we do no more than note theirexistence in this context, important though theyare. We should also note that our three globalorganizations developed regional associationswhich have often played key roles within theregions, while individual schools, social workers,and NGOs are usually united at state levelwithin national associations.

A brief history of the three global organiza-tions—IASSW, IFSW, and ICSW—can be foundin Healy (1995b, pp. 1505–06, and 2001,pp. 48–62). We shall provide only an introduc-tion to each of the three organizations.

International Associationof Schools of Social Work—IASSW

The IASSW began with 46 founding mem-bers from 10 countries in 1929, growing by 1939to 75 member schools from 18 countries. After atemporary setback resulting from World War II,

the association continued to expand, to organizeinternational conferences and seminars to facil-itate interchange, and to develop general stan-dards for social work education. It establishedan independent secretariat in 1971, led initiallyby the highly respected Katherine Kendall asthe first secretary-general. This office was main-tained until the late 1990s when the financialsituation necessitated a change to a voluntarysecretariat. The IASSW newsletters, publica-tions, and conferences represent major linksbetween schools of social work in developed anddeveloping countries, assisting the former toreflect global realities in their curricula, and thelatter to grow stronger and promote social workin their respective countries.

International Federationof Social Workers—IFSW

The predecessor of the IFSW, the Inter-national Permanent Secretariat of SocialWorkers, was founded in Paris in 1928 by socialworkers from several European countries andthe United States. Dissolved during World WarII, the organization was reformed in the 1950s,emerging eventually as the IFSW in 1956. Theprimary aim of the IFSW was to promote socialwork as a profession with professional standardsand ethics. The International Code of Ethicswas initially adopted in 1976, to be later revised.Another important goal was interchangebetween social workers around the globe, andthe IFSW’s regular conferences were organizedlargely to this end. The association has alsorepresented social work’s views on major worldissues through position papers and its consulta-tive status to the UN.

International Councilon Social Welfare—ICSW

The ICSW began its life in 1928 as the Inter-national Conference on Social Work, becomingthe ICSW in 1966. It is essentially an international


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

council composed of national social welfarecouncils together with some international associ-ations. Healy (2001, p. 59) reports that “there arecurrently 51 national committees and 31 othernational associations,” with 14 international orga-nizations also being members. The ICSWembraces “practitioners from various disciplinesand lay people interested in social welfare”(Healy). In 1982 the organization expanded itsfull name to International Council on SocialWelfare: A World Organization Promoting SocialDevelopment, thus beginning to identify moreclosely with the development movement.

All three organizations are active at the UNlevel, promote and engage in global social wel-fare and social development agendas, interactwith each other and with a range of other globalassociations, and generally facilitate their mem-bership’s active and professional contribution tointernational affairs. At the same time, eachseeks to assist its membership and to promotesocial work and social welfare at regional,national, and local levels. Together they publishthe journal International Social Work.

In addition, there are two more internationalorganizations that are relevant to the professionand of interest to students of international socialwork. These are the Interuniversity Consortiumfor International Social Development (IUCISD)and the Commonwealth Organization for SocialWork (COSW).

The IUCISD was started in the 1970s by agroup of social work educators to respond topressing human concerns from an interna-tional, multidisciplinary perspective. It hasmembers in dozens of countries and branchesin Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. Theorganization seeks to develop conceptualframeworks and effective intervention strate-gies geared to influencing local, national, andinternational systems. It organizes an interna-tional symposium every two years and pub-lishes the journal Social Development Issues.IUCISD serves as a clearinghouse for informa-tion on international social development andfosters collaboration with a variety of interna-tional bodies. Further information may be

obtained from its website (www.iucisd.org) (seeHealy, 1995b, p. 1506).

The Commonwealth Organization for SocialWork had its beginnings in the early 1990s atthe IFSW conference in Sri Lanka. It is anemerging organization open to citizens, includ-ing of course social workers, from Common-wealth countries (the Commonwealth is anassociation of 53 independent sovereign coun-tries committed to the Declaration of Common-wealth Principles agreed to in Singapore in 1971and reaffirmed in the Harare Declaration of1991) who are interested in supporting socialwork and social development. It is based inLondon with an honorary secretary-general.COSW’s main objectives are to promote andsupport communication and collaborationbetween social workers and social work asso-ciations in commonwealth countries, and touphold and promote the code of ethics of theIFSW. The organization has the potential tocontribute significantly to international socialwork’s development.

However, it must be acknowledged that allfive organizations seek to carry out their diverseand important roles with very limited resources,both financial and in terms of full-time person-nel. International work is rendered expensive bythe costs of travel and of maintaining effectivecommunication links globally. Moreover, thedifficulties inherent in consolidating a diversityof international views into a cohesive and mean-ingful statement or position paper for presenta-tion in a variety of contexts should not beunderestimated. Despite these inherent limita-tions, the work of these five global organizationshas been and continues to be highly commend-able, often in large part due to the dedicatedcontributions of a relatively small number ofcommitted individuals. However, we might alsonote that the three main global social work orga-nizations represent probably fewer than half ofthe world’s nations, reflecting the still limitedspread of social work globally.

From the perspective of international socialwork, the IASSW and IFSW in particular mustbe seen as carrying significant responsibility


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

for the ongoing development of this field ofpractice. In particular, they should be able toassist developed and developing countries intheir struggle to promote social work educationand practice, to speak with governments, toassist in developing curricula, to facilitate visitsto these countries by experienced practitionersand educators, to assist with the securing ofappropriate social work literature, and to ensurethat personnel within these countries are linkedinto global social work networks. Much activityalong these lines has occurred in the past, butmuch more remains to be done, and it is to behoped that the IASSW and IFSW will proveincreasingly able to rise to the challenge.

International Social Work

Accepting that social work is an internationalunified profession with a common core, let usturn to a consideration of international socialwork. In the above discussion of social work wehave implied that social work possesses all of theelements of a global profession, despite its inher-ent diversity. This is argued by Midgley (1995b,p. 1494), by Elliott (1997) after considering socialwork practice in seventeen countries, by Healy(2001) after considering social work educationaround the world, and by Kendall (2000) afterconsidering the organization of social work as aninternational profession. (See also Midgley, 2001.)In this text, the focus in defining internationalsocial work is not on social work as a globalprofession but rather on the roles of the profes-sion in the international field.

The Definition ofInternational Social Work

In her text on international social work,Healy (2001, p. 7) defined international socialwork as follows:

International social work is defined as inter-national professional practice and the capac-ity for international action by the social work

profession and its members. Internationalaction has four dimensions: internationallyrelated domestic practice and advocacy, pro-fessional exchange, international practice,and international policy development andadvocacy.

Let us consider this definition. Healy com-mences by stating that international social workis social work practiced internationally, as dis-tinct from locally and nationally. The assump-tion is that there are situations that are global innature, thus requiring a global approach. In ourunderstanding of international social work,however, we shall include practice pertaining toglobal concerns but taking place at national andlocal levels within countries. In the light of theseglobal needs, Healy asserts that social work hasthe capacity to take international action—anassertion that we also set out to affirm in thistext. Healy then lists four dimensions of interna-tional action, each of which is important.

The first dimension reflects an appreciationthat, in an era of globalization, much if not alldomestic practice requires an international per-spective. We accept the importance of this dimen-sion. Healy’s second dimension, professionalexchange, suggests that an international professionrequires an international structure that encouragesits members around the world to engage in mutualexchange at various levels and facilitates thisprocess. Without this, a profession internationallyis no more than a collection of national structuresand outlooks. In our view of this professionalexchange aspect of international social work, partof its importance is the extent to which social workin the developed industrial world can learn frominnovations in the developing world. The thirddimension, international practice, is the key focusof this text. It implies a need and a capacity forsocial work to engage in a range of actions at theinternational level, reflecting the same values,goals, and practice methods that apply at other lev-els. Finally, Healy includes the policy dimension, orthe need for social work to advocate for the devel-opment and effective implementation of policiesprotecting the rights and enhancing the well-being


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

of all peoples of the world. Some writers havefocused exclusively on this policy dimension (e.g.,Deacon, 1997).

One aspect of international social work thatwe find missing from Healy’s definition is thegoal of the profession to see itself establishedaround the world. The current reality is thatsocial work is virtually nonexistent in all of thepoorest countries of the world (the UN’s LeastDeveloped Countries or LDCs of which there aresome 48) and is in an embryonic stage in manyother developing countries. It is not professionalambition that leads to our desire to see a strongsocial work profession in all countries. Rather itis our vision of the roles that social work canplay, and should be playing, in the least or lesserdeveloped countries; and our concern as we dis-cuss international social work is that it doesnot represent a form of neoimperialism, with thewestern branches of the profession spearheadingits emergence as a truly international profession.

While we appreciate Healy’s definition ofinternational social work, we shall define it alittle differently to be in keeping with thepurpose of this text:

International social work is the promotion ofsocial work education and practice globallyand locally, with the purpose of building atruly integrated international professionthat reflects social work’s capacity to respondappropriately and effectively, in educationand practice terms, to the various global chal-lenges that are having a significant impact onthe well-being of large sections of the world’spopulation. This global and local promotionof social work education and practice is basedon an integrated-perspectives approach thatsynthesizes global, human rights, ecological,and social development perspectives of inter-national situations and responses to them.

There are several important aspects of this defi-nition. The definition commences with the impor-tance of action: international social work consistsessentially of active promotion by the profession atvarious levels of the profession’s involvement in

global challenges. The link between education andpractice is important in all professions, and inter-national social work requires a much strongerfocus within social work education curricula thanit has received to date (Healy 2001, chap.11) if itsscope is to expand. The emphasis on an integratedprofession reflects the ever-present danger of theWest imposing on other countries its basic under-standing of the nature and roles of social work. Wehave already seen significant departures from west-ern social work traditions in Latin America(Queiro-Tajalli, 1997) and in Africa and Asia(Mayadas et al., 1997; Kendall, 2000), as well asconcerns about professional development trends inthe United States (Specht, 1990), United Kingdom(Harris, 1990), and elsewhere. It is important toaccept the necessary diversity across the professionwithin an integrated overall acceptance of theessential nature of social work. The key emphasis ofthe definition is that social work should engage inresponses to the significant global challenges thatare consistent with the essential nature of socialwork and in responses that are effective within thecontext of these global challenges. These responsesare informed by the integrated-perspectivesapproach outlined in Chapter 2. Finally, the socialwork focus in participating in the internationalresponse to global challenges is driven by a concernfor individual and collective well-being, reflectingthe core values and goals of the profession as wellas our integrated-perspectives approach.

Some important features of the definition:

• Action to address social work educationand practice at global and local levels.

• Links between education and internationalpractice.

• Integration of diverse practices rather thandomination by one country or culture.

• An integrated-perspectives approach topractice—i.e., a synthesis of global, humanrights, ecological, and social developmentperspectives.

• Individual and collective well-being.

In using the term international social work,there is always a danger that some will interpret


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

it as applying only to one specific level ofintervention, namely the international. However,as is commonly stressed, the focus in any contextneeds to be on all levels, from the local or domes-tic to the global or international. Whether theconcern is with conflict, poverty, displacement,ecological degradation, or development in any ofits dimensions (economic, political, social, cul-tural, or legal), the local, regional, national, andinternational levels will be significant, and ourexploration of international social work practicewill reflect this same range of levels.

The focus of this text is on international socialwork responding to global challenges and thesocial realities within the developing world, whileappreciating that international social work hasalso many applications within the so-called devel-oped world. Indeed, the utilization of the termsdeveloped country and developing country, whilewidespread in the literature, is in fact ambiguous.It is far better to think in terms of degrees ofdevelopment along a pathway that possesses nopreordained destination, or perhaps, more pre-cisely, we should think in terms of a greater rangeof categories of countries defined in terms oftheir level and type of development (see WorldBank, 1997, p. 265).

The Scope of InternationalSocial Work in Terms ofits Response to Global Concerns

In this text there is frequent reference to differ-ent fields of international concern and activity,reflecting an international tendency to use thislanguage. For example, we have the fields ofpoverty and its alleviation, development, naturaldisasters and responding to them, health con-cerns, and so on. Much of the organization withinthe international community and the literature isalong these lines. However, social work and thevarious helping professions, in addition to focus-ing on fields as defined, frequently also focus onspecific populations, either within fields, cuttingacross fields, or seeing the fields as factors affect-ing the specific population. Examples include

women in poverty, street children, indigenousminorities, sufferers of HIV/AIDS, and so on.Whatever the specific focus of any agency or bodyof literature, it is important to appreciate that thevarious fields are highly interactive and need to beappreciated as such. For example, the fields ofpoverty, conflict, and ecological degradation areoften closely related in cause and effect terms—that is, both poverty and conflict can contribute toecological degradation, while poverty and ecolog-ical degradation can contribute to conflict, and soon. Hence, appreciating the context in which anyspecific population lives requires understandingthe ways in which several fields interact as theyimpinge on the specific population in question.Finally, in responding to specific fields or popula-tions, there is the question of the level of theresponse. Responses can usually be found at atleast three levels: international, national, and local;however, the fourth level of regions could also beincluded. For example, in relation to some par-ticular aspect of development, or some particu-lar situation of conflict, responses may comefrom the UN (international), the European Union(regional), various governments (national), andlocal organizations and movements (local).

Our understanding of international socialwork is that its potential relevance covers virtuallyall of the fields of activity that concern the inter-national community, a wide range of specificpopulations within each field (or cutting acrossfields), and all levels at which intervention is nec-essary and possible. In this text, we have selecteda few fields and a few specific populations onwhich to focus, not only because of their impor-tance but as examples, and have confined our dis-cussion largely to the local level, without negatingthe importance of the other levels both per se andas areas of activity for social workers. We focus onthe local level partly because of its neglect bysocial work in many developing country contexts,and partly because it represents in most cases thefield work on which social work at the other lev-els, and on which policy and advocacy work andso on, should be based. Local work representsboth our right to speak out and engage in policyand planning activities, and the source of the


01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

knowledge and experience on which, to a largedegree, we base our work at the other levels.

Conclusion

Social work has emerged as a very broad profes-sion, both within individual countries and in aglobal comparative sense. While its western andcolonial origins have left their imprint on theprofession, we can still see social work evolving ina range of very different contexts with highly var-ied emphases. In this chapter, however, our focusis limited to the international scene, and in two

particular ways. First, there is the question ofsocial work’s potential to contribute to the allevi-ation of the major social problems and areas ofneed that preoccupy large sections of the interna-tional community. Second, and closely related tothe first, is the potential of social work to con-tribute to confronting these global needs as theyare experienced in the least developed countriesand areas of the world. We agree with many othercommentators that social work does have thepotential to contribute much in these interrelatedareas, and we shall go on in this text to suggesthow that goal might be achieved, both generallyand in relation to specific fields of work.


• The understanding of social work, and its application of knowledge and skills, varies greatlyacross the globe. Despite such variation, the IFSW social work definition is accepted by manycountries and can be adopted by many other countries. However, what is commonlyaccepted by all is its value base and commitment to social change.

• Formal social work education originated, and developed, as a full-fledged profession in theWest. Later it spread to many countries, including former colonies. By and large this westernsocial work education pattern prevails in most parts of the world, though each country hasadded its own unique features to its education and practice model. There is a need to indig-enize social work education in accordance with the varied country contexts.

• Social work education, practice, and professional organizations vary significantly in terms ofthe balance between the three areas of practice, namely supporting the welfare state, provid-ing casework services, and engaging in social development. Several complex factors influencethe balance between these practice areas, which is often a source of criticism of the profes-sion that raises several critical issues. A comprehensive and integrated response is needed atboth local and global levels.

• International social work organizations have a significant responsibility and can play crucialroles in further developing social work as a global profession.

• International social work needs to be understood in terms of education and practice and ofinterdependence between the two, resulting in diversity that is nonetheless held together bythe four integrated perspectives geared essentially to the promotion of individual andcollective well-being.

Summary

01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM


Questions and Topics for Discussion

• Compare and contrast the IFSW’s and Barker’s (1999) social work definitions.

• Summarize the main points you have noted while studying the origins of social work in theWest, expansion of the profession into former colonies, and indigenization of social work.

• Does the suggested division of social work into three main areas make sense according toyour experience?

• Why do you think there is an imbalance in the practice of the three areas in different nationalcontexts, and what kind of issues does it raise for the profession?

• As an exercise, visit the websites of international social work organizations; study their aims,objectives, and current activities; and discuss these with peers.

• Compare and contrast the two definitions of international social work (one by Healy, 2001;and another by the authors of this text).

• Discuss recent trends and key issues in international social work practice.

Possible Areas for Research Projects

• Carry out an analysis of varied conceptions of international social work and of how profes-sional social workers and other relevant professionals perceive international social work.

• Examine the impact of western social work models and the extent of indigenization of socialwork in selected developing countries.

• Study the factors that enhance and hamper indigenization of social work education andpractice within a particular place.

• Examine the factors that have influenced the choice of areas of practice locally and explorestrategies for developing a good balance in practice.

• Develop case studies on selected professional social work organizations.

Further Reading

Healy, L. (2001). International social work: Professional action in an interdependent world. New York:

Oxford University Press.

Mayadas, N. S., Watts, T. D., & Elliott D. (Eds.). (1997). International handbook on social work

theory and practice. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Ramanathan, C. S., & Link, R. J. (Eds.). (1999). All our futures: Principles and resources for social work

practice in a global era. Boston: Brooks/Cole.

01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

01-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 6:21 PM

International Social Work - us.sagepub.com

Documents

Transcript of International Social Work - us.sagepub.com