Projects / Programmes
Quality of Life of Social Groups
January 1, 2017
- December 31, 2021
| Code |
Science |
Field |
Subfield |
| 5.03.00 |
Social sciences |
Sociology |
|
| Code |
Science |
Field |
| S210 |
Social sciences |
Sociology |
| Code |
Science |
Field |
| 5.04 |
Social Sciences |
Sociology |
quality of life, social security, cohesion, social inclusion, public policies, social development, welfare, users, empowerment, NGOs, health, aging, housing and community, social networks and social support, gender, care, indicators, evaluation, and methodology
Researchers (15)
Organisations (1)
Abstract
Explaining the factors of quality of life (QL) in a society welfare system or welfare regime has an important role (Esping-Andersen 2009; Vogel 2003; Taylor-Gooby 2004). Welfare systems encompass different welfare actors: the welfare state with its sectorial policies and welfare services, non-profit and for-profit organizations, family and social networks. Within the provision of welfare, the role of the community as the provider of services has recently gained importance, which represents an alternative to and the completion of the state and market sector (Loughran 2003; Gilchrist 2004; Chanan in Miller 2013). Strengthening the role of the community in the welfare provision is a development trend evident in the changing role of the welfare state, which is decentralizing, moving closer to the community, and increasing the influence and involvement of the local population and organizations within the services supply (Parsons 1995; Colebatch 2005). Our thesis is that during the recent period in Slovenia, the community is gaining ever-greater importance within the welfare triangle, but at the same time, there are limitations to what extent communities can provide welfare for individuals. Thus, we will discuss the following research questions: What is the role of the community in relation to the other sectors within the system? What is the role of community in providing QL for different social groups (particularly the elderly, children, families, marginal groups, and patients)? What are the new modes of QL provision (actions, mechanisms, and organizational forms) that are emerging within communities? What are the new concepts and practices through which an individual becomes active in his/her community and influences his/her own life and the life of the community? What is the role of different actors within the community in providing QL (family, non-governmental organizations, and municipality)? What is the role of the community in Slovenia in reference to international comparisons? We will use the following qualitative and quantitative methods; we will begin with a systematic literature review, review of policy documents, strategies and legislation in Slovenia. Our empirical analysis will be focused on different levels (micro, mezzo, macro), fields and actors of QL. The originality of the research work will also be demonstrated by the participatory intervention research and in-depth case studies of individual communities and innovative activities within these communities. Descriptive and multivariate statistical methods will be used on existing domestic and international databases which will also permit international comparative analyses. In this way we are developing a new perspective for researching welfare-related issues comparatively, with an emphasis on the role of community as the provider of welfare, which has not been satisfactorily included in a welfare regime typology. We will identify new forms of actions within the community, including transformative practices and social innovations.
Significance for science
The research group is responding to and actively participating in the most recent academic discussions about restructuring the welfare state. The role of different welfare actors and trends toward the individual’s responsibility for welfare has been a central theme in recent discussions (see Hamerlijk 2013; Taylor-Gooby 2015; Bonoli in Natali 2012). While community could be a way of transferring this responsibility to the individual (Jupp 2015), it could be at the same time the way to prevent excessive individualization. Many established welfare theorists have warned about the dangers of an uncritical transfer of responsibility to individuals (see Beck 1992; Dean 1996; Culpitt 1999; Mishra 1999). We are developing a new perspective for researching welfare-related issues comparatively, with an emphasis on the role of community as the provider of welfare, which has not been satisfactorily included in a welfare regime typology. We therefore address this gap in literature and add to it with a specific perspective on role of community.
Furthermore, we wish to contribute to the potential formation of new QL (Quality of Life) indicators by including community action. We will deepen the understanding of how individuals experience and conceptualize QL in their communities; we will establish how the transfer of responsibility for wellbeing from the welfare state to individuals, families, and communities is actualized in specific communities; we will find out what characteristics of communities are important for shaping individuals’ QL, and therefore add to the academic discussion in this field, within the intersection of quality of life (of individuals and groups) and community.
In research, most advanced methodological techniques will be used. We will use the methodological approach of triangulation in its broadest terms, encompassing the triangulation of methods, researchers, domains, methods, and units of research (e.g. Denzin in Lincoln 2005; Creswell in Plano 2007). In addition, we explore new forms of actions within the community, including transformative practices and social innovations. The originality of the research work will therefore also be demonstrated with the intervention research and with the inclusion of all participants. With in-depth case studies of individual communities and individual innovative activities within the community, we will investigate which new ways (forms, mechanisms, and organizational forms) affect the community QL.
Significance for the country
Within the provision of welfare, the role of the community as the provider of services has recently gained importance, which represents an alternative to and the completion of the state and market sector (e.g. Loughran 2003; Gilchrist 2004; Chanan in Miller 2013). This is particularly important in Slovenia, as social development in the past decades has followed the logic of transferring the responsibilities for wellbeing from the welfare state toward communities, families, and individuals. Many health and social services are fragmented and, thus, not user-friendly. Observation and examination of QL connected to community is, therefore, of utmost importance for Slovenia.
The role of the community is also acknowledged in the development documents of different sectorial policies. This can be seen in the EU cohesion policy and within social inclusion policies. Thus, the Slovenian operational program of cohesion policy for the period from 2014-2020 recognizes the multidimensional role of the community and includes among its priority tasks the “encouragement of social inclusion with easier access to social, cultural and recreational services, and transition from institutional services to community forms of services” and “investment within the framework of local development strategies led by the community.” Hence, our research is embodied within the current developments trends in the welfare provision and besides the advances in the academic discipline also has a high applicability, as it enhances our knowledge on how different sectorial policies influence QL and where the possibilities are for their improvement. The findings will point to the shortcomings for achieving higher QL, particularly for the most vulnerable groups. Therefore, they will enable the informed development of different policies in Slovenia, such as social policies, housing, health, family policies, and others. Furthermore, the results will indicate the relevant spatial differences in Slovenia QL and the variations in different local communities’ capabilities to ensure the welfare of their residents. This will enable informed discussions on different inequality generators in Slovenia, which is relevant for societal development, including the need for regionalization. We will disseminate our findings not only to the scientific community and through educational processes but also to policymakers at all levels, starting at the national level and continuing down to the community level. We will also communicate our findings to organizers of services, such as social home care, nursing homes, and community health centres. Furthermore, the research group will actively contribute to the development of policies, since the researchers are members of professional groups for the preparation of strategic and development documents in Slovenia (e.g. documents on demographic change and aging). Therefore, our research is significantly important for individuals’ QL, for raising awareness of community QL for individuals, and for initiating and informing possible changes in individual communities.
Most important scientific results
Annual report
2017,
2018,
2019
Most important socioeconomically and culturally relevant results
Annual report
2017,
2018,
2019
