Abstract
The aim of this article is to develop theory and generate knowledge about the challenges and possibilities of co‐producing change in a social housing programme. The purpose of the project was to implement the Housing First philosophy in the social housing programme in the city of Helsingborg, Sweden. The aim was also to create opportunities for service user involvement. Several innovative measures were implemented in order for these changes to occur from autumn 2016 to summer 2017. The social services commissioned a university course on which social workers and their clients studied together on equal terms to create project plans for the further development of their own workplace. A “Future” workshop was held by the researchers with representatives from all the different housing options (the shelter, transitional housing, category housing, Housing First apartments), both clients and social workers. Repeated dialogue meetings were conducted at the different housing options to discuss how service user involvement could be developed and to discover new ways of participation. This article is based on a strengths‐based perspective using the theoretical discussions on social traps, as well as the concepts of enabling and entrapping niches. We show the importance of social workers identifying and supporting missing heroes—service users who want to participate and be involved in co‐producing change. We also show that if an organisation is not prepared for the initiated changes, there is a risk of disappointment due to awakened expectations that are not fulfilled. Building trust is also an important component to emerge from the material, but we also found that change processes can be initiated that continue and have impact beyond the initial project’s goals.
Subject
Sociology and Political Science,Social Psychology
Reference38 articles.
1. Allport, G. W. (1979). The nature of prejudice. Perseus Books.
2. Askheim, O. P., Beresford, P., & Heule, C. (2017). Mend the gap—Strategies for user involvement in social work education. Social Work Education, 36(2), 128–140.
3. Askheim, O. P., Lid, I. M., & Østensjø, S. (2019). Samproduksjon i forskning—Hva er det, og hva innebærer det? [Co-production in research—What is it, and what does it mean?] In O. P. Askheim, I. M. Lid, & S. Østensjø (Eds.), Samproduksjon i forskning. Forskning med nya aktører [Co-production in research. Research with new actors] (pp. 13–35). Universitetsforlaget.
4. Askheim, O. P., & Raak Høiseth, J. (2019). Medforskerrollen—I spenningsfeltet mellom anerkjennelse, kooptering og “Tokenisme” [The role of the co-researcher—In the tension field between recognition, co-optation and “Tokenism”]. In O. P. Askheim, I. M. Lid, & S. Østensjø (Eds.), Samproduksjon i forskning. Forskning med nye aktører [Co-production in research. Research with new actors] (pp. 214–230). Universitetsforlaget.
5. Benjaminsen, L., Dhalmann, H., Dyb, E., Knutagård, M., & Lindén, J. (2020). Measurement of homelessness in the Nordic countries. European Journal of Homelessness, 14(3), 159–180. https://www.feantsaresearch.org/public/user/Observatory/2021/EJH_14-3_A7_v02.pdf
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献