How do social welfare policies and practices build or undermine resilience in poor households? An international comparative study

Lead researchers - Professor Margaret Whitehead (Department of Public Health) & Professor Chris Jones (Department of Social Policy), University of Liverpool
Co-investigators - Dr Krysia Canvin, University of Liverpool; Dr Bo Burström & team, Karolinksa Institute, Stockholm

This is a qualitative research project that examines the role of social welfare policies and practices in either fostering or undermining resilience and capacity in families facing adversity.

The project has two arms. The first will draw a sample of families in contact with British social workers, and conduct a series of in-depth interviews using ethnographic approaches. Families in similar situations, but with differing apparent trajectories, will be selected for study, exploring such questions as: why has this family gone under whereas another has not? What are the facets of resilience they show in their survival? Why does that resilience sometimes collapse? What role has contact with the statutory services and social policies played in buffering or corroding resilience? The ultimate purpose would be to identify ways in which social welfare policies and practices could be improved to foster existing strengths of vulnerable families.

The second arm consists of a parallel study in Sweden, collecting primary data that would then allow a comparative analysis of the role of social welfare policies and practices in the two countries in enhancing resilience. The rationale for this cross-national arm of the study is built on Whitehead's recent ESRC-funded work on social welfare policies and lone mothers, which indicated that poverty may be more damaging to health in Britain than in Sweden. One hypothesis stemming from these observations is that there may be aspects of the social and policy context in Britain that add to and reinforce the negative experience of being poor. Conversely, there may be other aspects of living in Swedish society that are supportive for people in poverty, which make the experience of poverty less stressful and health damaging. This hypothesis will be investigated through in-depth interviews with family members living in poverty in Sweden, coupled with comparative policy analysis, carried out jointly by the British and Swedish teams. Arm One of the project will last for 36 months, Arm Two for 24 months - starting in Year Two of the project and then running in parallel with Arm One.

Theoretically, the rationale for the project is built on the understanding that, for too long, concepts of welfare dependency and the deficit model in relation to these families have gone unchallenged. Yet Jones' recent data, for example, reveal that many clients, despite considerable misfortune, have qualities of resilience which often go unacknowledged. Instead of pathologizing them as problems, there is a need to analyse how these families manage and cope in often dire circumstances. Empirical research which gives the recipients of welfare an opportunity to speak of their experiences should provide for more nuanced and sensitive perspectives on resilience and dependency.

This page last modified 30 November, 2007 by Administrator