Attitudes to voluntary action

R. Lindsey, J. Mohan, Sarah L. Bulloch, E. Metcalfe
{"title":"Attitudes to voluntary action","authors":"R. Lindsey, J. Mohan, Sarah L. Bulloch, E. Metcalfe","doi":"10.1332/POLICYPRESS/9781447324836.003.0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter reviews existing research on attitudes to voluntary action. Despite the importance of this topic, public attitudes have received even less consistent consideration over time than voluntary action itself. This chapter summarises information from the National Survey of Volunteering (1981 and 1991) and the British Social Attitudes Surveys (from the 1990s) on the virtues of voluntarism, and the relationship between voluntary action and government policy. However, given the later gaps in the statistical record, the emphasis in the chapter is firmly upon two key Mass Observation Project directives, implemented 16 years apart, in 1996 and 2012. Writers have a strong sense of where the boundary should lie between statutory responsibility and voluntary initiative; and demonstrate particular concerns of and criticisms about the use of volunteers to substitute for paid staff, and to undercut the position of the lowest-paid members of society. Writers also discuss strong concerns about the ways in which governments take the contribution of volunteers for granted, leading to scepticism about individual and community capacities to take on further social responsibilities. We argue that the rationales on which appeals for greater voluntary effort are made are crucial to the success of these appeals.","PeriodicalId":199990,"journal":{"name":"Continuity and Change in Voluntary Action","volume":"4648 3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Continuity and Change in Voluntary Action","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/POLICYPRESS/9781447324836.003.0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This chapter reviews existing research on attitudes to voluntary action. Despite the importance of this topic, public attitudes have received even less consistent consideration over time than voluntary action itself. This chapter summarises information from the National Survey of Volunteering (1981 and 1991) and the British Social Attitudes Surveys (from the 1990s) on the virtues of voluntarism, and the relationship between voluntary action and government policy. However, given the later gaps in the statistical record, the emphasis in the chapter is firmly upon two key Mass Observation Project directives, implemented 16 years apart, in 1996 and 2012. Writers have a strong sense of where the boundary should lie between statutory responsibility and voluntary initiative; and demonstrate particular concerns of and criticisms about the use of volunteers to substitute for paid staff, and to undercut the position of the lowest-paid members of society. Writers also discuss strong concerns about the ways in which governments take the contribution of volunteers for granted, leading to scepticism about individual and community capacities to take on further social responsibilities. We argue that the rationales on which appeals for greater voluntary effort are made are crucial to the success of these appeals.
对自愿行动的态度
本章回顾了对自愿行为态度的现有研究。尽管这一主题很重要,但长期以来,公众态度得到的考虑甚至不如自愿行动本身得到的一致考虑。本章总结了国家志愿调查(1981年和1991年)和英国社会态度调查(20世纪90年代)关于志愿主义的优点以及志愿行动和政府政策之间关系的信息。然而,考虑到统计记录的后期差距,本章的重点坚定地放在1996年和2012年相隔16年实施的两个关键的质量观测项目指令上。作者对法定责任和自愿主动性之间的界限有很强的意识;并对使用志愿者代替有偿工作人员,削弱社会中最低收入成员的地位表示特别关注和批评。作者还讨论了对政府将志愿者的贡献视为理所当然的方式的强烈担忧,这导致了对个人和社区承担进一步社会责任的能力的怀疑。我们认为,呼吁作出更大自愿努力所依据的理由对这些呼吁的成功至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信