The recent and current transformations concerning the

role of civic elements in the re-

organisation of social services

Adalbert Evers

NordWel Summer School 2008Hanasaari, 21. – 26. August

2008

2

Introduction : main concern and structure of the paper

In many areas like health or care it has become increasingly problematic to have debates just about the social service – sector

Public and private, social and commercial parts interact and people seek arrangements across these lines of division

Accordingly the quest is cross-nationally about better qualities of the complex service-system; the message is that here, calling for more civic services, could be here a central point of reference

Because civicness can be associated likewise with personal and political/democratic concerns; accordingly cross-nationally reference to civicness/civility is made in public and academic discourses

The paper has two parts:

Part I: on the meaning of civicness,

Part II: contributions and challenges to civicness as they come about with different competing discourses on modernisation, welfare and social services

3

Part 1.: On Civicness

From civility to civicness - Virtues, institutions and discourses Qualities associated with civility are mostly phrased in terms of virtues and manners of individual citizens e. g. tolerance; self-restraint, mutual respect

Yet they are not simply a private issue of good manners

The question is: What processes and institutions in society can cultivate civility?

With an eye on this civicness goes beyond civility: it includes as well a look at the quality of institutions, the public realm and discourses, the ways they stimulate, reproduce, and cultivate civility;

4

Ancient and modern notions of civility and civicness

Civility and civicness meant something different in ancient and modern times - In societies with hierarchical social order notions of civility were very much a class-demarcating feature and the rules of conduct for a “gentle man” very much marked by the need to serve authority - public and private

Central for the modern notion of civility were the liberal revolutions and later on the support and challenge that arose with democracy- A different kind of civility is needed in such societies for regulating conflicts in a public sphere, balancing diversity and loyality in the modern political community in civil ways

Civicness points to a link between an institutional configuration – like the one of a liberal order and a democratic welfare state – and a set of orientations of people that have a status as citizens, workers, consumers and members of communities and families

It is then (like civil society), a complex co-product of and ingredient in the interactions between state, society, market forces and communities

5

Three different dimensions of civility and civicness

The personal dimension: civility and respective institutions regulate the impersonal relationships in the public realm, to be based e.g. on notions of respect, personal rights

The political dimension: at the interface of culture and political culture, civility is about controlling aggression in politics, about managing conflicts of power and interest groups

The social dimension: here civility is about conceiving the other as basically equal; civicness here is about strengthening what makes up for the same basic status of each co-citizen

Modern civility is a contested concept: while e. g. it is for some mainly about the good citizen following the rules, it is for others more about the capacity building to live together even under conditions of persisting sharp differences in plural and multicultural societies

6

B. Four discourses on welfare & services – their meaning for civicness

THESIS: through rivalling discourses on modernisation, welfare, services and democracy, civicness gets/looses impact and changes meaning

1. discourse: Traditional WelfarismService „Leitbild“: Public services as universal social rights

Addressees: Needy citizens and clients to be protected and compliant

Governance: Hierarchical steering towards uniform standards, often in corporatist settings

Third sector´s role: may be gap filling, complementary, or part of corporatist public provision

CONTRIBUTION TO CIVICNESS: Giving people a respected status by adding social to democratic citizenship

7

2. discourse: Empowerment and Participation

Service „Leitbild“: a rich diversity of enabling and locally embedded services

Addressees: Users to be respected as members of subgroups with diversified needs; to be empowered to become co-producers

Governance Public policies open for voice; decentralising power towards local people, active citizens and communities

Third sector´s role: TSOs taking lead in advocacy, voice, well tailored provision and innovation for new needs

CONTRIBUTION TO CIVICNESS: Giving respect an additional meaning and impact: making it more personal and more accessible to disesteemed minorities

8

3. discourse: Consumerism

Service „Leitbild“: Personal services meeting group-specific preferences

Addressees: Competent consumer citizens

Governance: Regulating social markets for choice-led personal services

Third sector´s role: as providers, TSOs add up to service choice; as lobbies TSOs are expected to give consumers a voice

CONTRIBUTION TO CIVICNESS: Making rights on choice a part of service cultures

9

4. discourse: Managing social investments

Service „Leitbild“: Proper allocated and managed care and support that helps in producing human capital

Addressees: Citizen workers to be activated and supervised

Governance: Systems of co-governance, aiming at broad public and private actors´ support for government-led programs

Third sector´s role: TSOs as providers to be contracted in and organisations that intermediate public policies

CONTRIBUTION TO CIVICNESS: Strengthening notions of public concerns, peoples obligations and “good conduct” as parts of civicness

10

C. Summary and conclusions 1.Other than civility, civicness points at the interdependency

of individual and collective behaviour with discourses, norms and institutions that help to cultivate it.

2. Modern liberal societies have their own notions of civility and institutions for a more civic society: respectful interpersonal relations, self-restraint in conflicts and reducing superior/inferior

3. The presently rivalling modernisation discourses and the changing notions of welfare they bring about, are at a time contributing and harmful to civicness.

4. A call for more CIVIC services makes a difference. Beyond issues of redistribution it directs the attention to a broad spectre of quality items, across the landscape of personal services at large

5. Civicness contested: While many discourses on civicness in services are about “making it personal” – issues of personal rights, choice and respect, there is as well a counter-tendency: a discourse on effective services that calls for top down models of good conduct of citizens.