促进津巴布韦发展社会福利方法:挑战与前景

S.T.W. Mhiribidi
{"title":"促进津巴布韦发展社会福利方法:挑战与前景","authors":"S.T.W. Mhiribidi","doi":"10.4314/JSDA.V25I2.65059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study was prompted by the on - going discourse on the appropriateness of existing social welfare delivery mechanisms in the Third World which, over time, have tended to be informed by the modernization approach. The prevailing view, particularly among academics and practitioners in Africa, is essentially that the continent ought to promote the developmental rather than the remedial approach to social work, in order to more effectively address the challenges faced. Zimbabwe is one of the countries that seem to have heeded this call. The study therefore sought to establish the extent to which Zimbabwe is promoting the developmental approach to social welfare provision, with special focus on the public assistance scheme. Beneficiaries of public assistance through the Department of Social Services were targeted and key informants were interviewed. A key finding of the study was that the public assistance scheme in Zimbabwe has remained essentially remedial, with only limited attempts made towards initiatives that facilitate a developmental thrust (i.e. self reliance). It emerged from the study findings that at the policy level, the thrust of the Department of Social Services (DSS) is to implement both remedial and developmental approaches to social work, while on the ground only a few of the activities of the DSS could be regarded as developmental in nature. The reason given for this anomaly was mainly scarcity of resources. The study revealed that while developmental social work was preferred (especially by the professional social workers), remedial social work is likely to remain a predominant feature particularly because of lack of a conducive environment that would enable the majority of the Department of Social Services clients to move towards self-reliance.","PeriodicalId":85020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of social development in Africa","volume":"32 1","pages":"121-146"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Promoting the developmental social welfare approach in Zimbabwe: Challenges and prospects\",\"authors\":\"S.T.W. Mhiribidi\",\"doi\":\"10.4314/JSDA.V25I2.65059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The study was prompted by the on - going discourse on the appropriateness of existing social welfare delivery mechanisms in the Third World which, over time, have tended to be informed by the modernization approach. The prevailing view, particularly among academics and practitioners in Africa, is essentially that the continent ought to promote the developmental rather than the remedial approach to social work, in order to more effectively address the challenges faced. Zimbabwe is one of the countries that seem to have heeded this call. The study therefore sought to establish the extent to which Zimbabwe is promoting the developmental approach to social welfare provision, with special focus on the public assistance scheme. Beneficiaries of public assistance through the Department of Social Services were targeted and key informants were interviewed. A key finding of the study was that the public assistance scheme in Zimbabwe has remained essentially remedial, with only limited attempts made towards initiatives that facilitate a developmental thrust (i.e. self reliance). It emerged from the study findings that at the policy level, the thrust of the Department of Social Services (DSS) is to implement both remedial and developmental approaches to social work, while on the ground only a few of the activities of the DSS could be regarded as developmental in nature. The reason given for this anomaly was mainly scarcity of resources. The study revealed that while developmental social work was preferred (especially by the professional social workers), remedial social work is likely to remain a predominant feature particularly because of lack of a conducive environment that would enable the majority of the Department of Social Services clients to move towards self-reliance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":85020,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of social development in Africa\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"121-146\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of social development in Africa\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4314/JSDA.V25I2.65059\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of social development in Africa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/JSDA.V25I2.65059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

这项研究是由于目前关于第三世界现有社会福利提供机制的适当性的讨论引起的,随着时间的推移,这些机制往往受到现代化方法的影响。普遍的看法,特别是非洲的学者和从业人员的看法基本上是,非洲大陆应该促进社会工作的发展办法,而不是补救办法,以便更有效地处理所面临的挑战。津巴布韦似乎是响应这一呼吁的国家之一。因此,这项研究试图确定津巴布韦在多大程度上促进社会福利提供的发展办法,并特别注重公共援助计划。通过社会服务部获得公共援助的受益人成为目标,并对主要举报人进行了面谈。这项研究的一项重要发现是,津巴布韦的公共援助计划基本上仍然是补救性的,只有有限的尝试采取促进发展的主动行动(即自力更生)。从研究结果中可以看出,在政策一级,社会事务部的重点是对社会工作采取补救和发展两种办法,而在实地,社会事务部只有少数活动可视为发展性质。造成这种反常现象的主要原因是资源匮乏。研究显示,虽然发展性社会工作是首选(特别是专业社会工作者),但补救性社会工作可能仍然是主要特点,特别是因为缺乏一个有利的环境,使社会服务署的大多数客户能够走向自力更生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Promoting the developmental social welfare approach in Zimbabwe: Challenges and prospects
The study was prompted by the on - going discourse on the appropriateness of existing social welfare delivery mechanisms in the Third World which, over time, have tended to be informed by the modernization approach. The prevailing view, particularly among academics and practitioners in Africa, is essentially that the continent ought to promote the developmental rather than the remedial approach to social work, in order to more effectively address the challenges faced. Zimbabwe is one of the countries that seem to have heeded this call. The study therefore sought to establish the extent to which Zimbabwe is promoting the developmental approach to social welfare provision, with special focus on the public assistance scheme. Beneficiaries of public assistance through the Department of Social Services were targeted and key informants were interviewed. A key finding of the study was that the public assistance scheme in Zimbabwe has remained essentially remedial, with only limited attempts made towards initiatives that facilitate a developmental thrust (i.e. self reliance). It emerged from the study findings that at the policy level, the thrust of the Department of Social Services (DSS) is to implement both remedial and developmental approaches to social work, while on the ground only a few of the activities of the DSS could be regarded as developmental in nature. The reason given for this anomaly was mainly scarcity of resources. The study revealed that while developmental social work was preferred (especially by the professional social workers), remedial social work is likely to remain a predominant feature particularly because of lack of a conducive environment that would enable the majority of the Department of Social Services clients to move towards self-reliance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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