Cultural safety, diversity and the servicer user and carer movement in mental health research

This study will be of interest to anyone concerned with a critical appraisal of mental health service users’ and carers’ participation in research collaboration and with the potential of the postcolonial paradigm of cultural safety to contribute to the service user research (SUR) movement. The history and nature of the mental health field and its relationship to colonial processes provokes a consideration of whether cultural safety could focus attention on diversity, power imbalance, cultural dominance and structural inequality, identified as barriers and tensions in SUR. We consider these issues in the context of state-driven approaches towards SUR in planning and evaluation and the concurrent rise of the SUR movement in the UK and Australia, societies with an intimate involvement in processes of colonisation. We consider the principles and motivations underlying cultural safety and SUR in the context of the policy agenda informing SUR. We conclude that while both cultural safety and SUR are underpinned by social constructionism constituting similarities in principles and intent, cultural safety has additional dimensions. Hence, we call on researchers to use the explicitly political and self-reflective process of cultural safety to think about and address issues of diversity, power and social justice in research collaboration.

Participatory action research for civic engagement

The future of civic engagement is characterised by both technological innovation as well as new technological user practices that are fuelled by trends towards mobile, personal devices; broadband connectivity; open data; urban interfaces; and, cloud computing. These technology trends are progressing at a rapid pace, and have led global technology vendors to package and sell the ‘Smart City’ as a centralized service delivery platform predicted to optimize and enhance cities’ key performance indicators – and generate a profitable market. The top-down deployment of these large and proprietary technology platforms have helped sectors such as energy, transport, and healthcare to increase efficiencies. However, an increasing number of scholars and commentators warn of another ‘IT bubble’ emerging. Along with some city leaders, they argue that the top-down approach does not fit the governance dynamics and values of a liberal democracy when applied across sectors. A thorough understanding is required, of the socio-cultural nuances of how people work, live, play across different environments, and how they employ social media and mobile devices to interact with, engage in, and constitute public realms. Although the term ‘slacktivism’ is sometimes used to denote a watered down version of civic engagement and activism that is reduced to clicking a ‘Like’ button and signing online petitions, we believe that we are far from witnessing another Biedermeier period that saw people focus on the domestic and the non-political. There is plenty of evidence to the contrary, such as post-election violence in Kenya in 2008, the Occupy movements in New York, Hong Kong and elsewhere, the Arab Spring, Stuttgart 21, Fukushima, the Taksim Gezi Park in Istanbul, and the Vinegar Movement in Brazil in 2013. These examples of civic action shape the dynamics of governments, and in turn, call for new processes to be incorporated into governance structures. Participatory research into these new processes across the triad of people, place and technology is a significant and timely investment to foster productive, sustainable, and livable human habitats. With this chapter, we want to reframe the current debates in academia and priorities in industry and government to allow citizens and civic actors to take their rightful centerpiece place in civic movements. This calls for new participatory approaches for co-inquiry and co-design. It is an evolving process with an explicit agenda to facilitate change, and we propose participatory action research (PAR) as an indispensable component in the journey to develop new governance infrastructures and practices for civic engagement. This chapter proposes participatory action research as a useful and fitting research paradigm to guide methodological considerations surrounding the study, design, development, and evaluation of civic technologies. We do not limit our definition of civic technologies to tools specifically designed to simply enhance government and governance, such as renewing your car registration online or casting your vote electronically on election day. Rather, we are interested in civic media and technologies that foster citizen engagement in the widest sense, and particularly the participatory design of such civic technologies that strive to involve citizens in political debate and action as well as question conventional approaches to political issues (DiSalvo, 2012; Dourish, 2010; Foth et al., 2013). Following an outline of some underlying principles and assumptions behind participatory action research, especially as it applies to cities, we will critically review case studies to illustrate the application of this approach with a view to engender robust, inclusive, and dynamic societies built on the principles of engaged liberal democracy. The rationale for this approach is an alternative to smart cities in a ‘perpetual tomorrow,’ (cf. e.g. Dourish & Bell, 2011), based on many weak and strong signals of civic actions revolving around technology seen today. It seeks to emphasize and direct attention to active citizenry over passive consumerism, human actors over human factors, culture over infrastructure, and prosperity over efficiency. First, we will have a look at some fundamental issues arising from applying simplistic smart city visions to the kind of a problem a city is (cf. Jacobs, 1961). We focus on the touch points between “the city” and its civic body, the citizens. In order to provide for meaningful civic engagement, the city must provide appropriate interfaces.

Empirical reference points for Bernstein’s model of pedagogic rights: Recontextualising the reconciliation agenda to Australian schooling

In this chapter we use Bernstein’s (2000) model of pedagogic rights to examine the learning experiences for non-Indigenous teachers in two reconciliation projects. In the context within which we write, reconciliation is the process of establishing a culture of mutual respect between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and non-Indigenous Australians. In 1991, the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody linked the continuation of racism in Australian society to the weak coverage of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander content in the school curriculum (Reconciliation Australia 2010). Nearly two decades later, the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians issued by the council of Federal, State and Territory Ministers of Education proclaimed that curriculum should enable all students to ‘understand and acknowledge the value of Indigenous cultures and possess the knowledge, skills and understanding to contribute to, and benefit from reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians’ (MCEETYA 2008, 9). Education holds out promise not only of better life chances for Indigenous young people, but also of replacing myths with understanding and tackling prejudice and racism within the non-Indigenous population. Bernstein’s (2000) model of pedagogic rights promises some purchase on this pedagogic work by providing concepts for looking systematically at the participation of non-Indigenous teachers in education. As observed by Frandji and Vitale (Chapter 2, this volume), the model is not sufficient to achieve a democratic reality, ‘but simply provides a basis for problematizing reality and considering possibilities’.

The social inclusion policy agenda in Australia: A case of old wine, new bottles?

The election of an Australian Labor Government in Australia in 2007 saw ‘social inclusion’ emerge as the official and overarching social policy agenda. Being ‘included’ was subsequently defined by the ALP Government as being able to ‘have the resources, opportunities and capabilities needed to learn, work, engage and have a voice’. Various researchers in Australia demonstrated an interest in social inclusion, as it enabled them to construct a multi-dimensional framework for measuring disadvantage. This research program resulted in various forms of statistical modelling based on some agreement about what it means to be included in society. The multi-dimensional approach taken by academic researchers, however, did not necessarily translate to a new model of social policy development or implementation. We argue that, similar to the experience of the UK, Australia’s social inclusion policy agenda was for the most part narrowly and individually defined by politicians and policy makers, particularly in terms of equating being employed with being included. We conclude with discussion about the need to strengthen the social inclusion framework by adopting an understanding of social inequality and social justice that is more relational and less categorical.

Let’s talk about lex: Narrative analysis as both research method and teaching technique in law

Law is narration: it is narrative, narrator and the narrated. As a narrative, the law is constituted by a constellation of texts – from official sources such as statutes, treaties and cases, to private arrangements such as commercial contracts, deeds and parenting plans. All are a collection of stories: cases are narrative contests of facts and rights; statutes are recitations of the substantive and procedural bases for social, economic and political interactions; private agreements are plots for future relationships, whether personal or professional. As a narrator, law speaks in the language of modern liberalism. It describes its world in abstractions rather than in concrete experience, universal principles rather than individual subjectivity. It casts people into ‘parties’ to legal relationships; structures human interactions into ‘issues’ or ‘problems’; and tells individual stories within larger narrative arcs such as ‘the rule of law’ and ‘the interests of justice’. As the narrated, the law is a character in its own story. The scholarship of law, for example, is a type of story-telling with law as its central character. For positivists, still the dominant group in the legal genre, law is a closed system of formal rules with an “immanent rationality” and its own “structure, substantive content, procedure and tradition,” dedicated to finality of judgment. For scholars inspired by the interpretative tradition in the humanities, law is a more ambivalent character, susceptible to influences from outside its realm and masking a hidden ideological agenda under its cloak of universality and neutrality. For social scientists, law is a protagonist on a wider social stage, impacting on society, the economy and the polity is often surprising ways.

The SAGE Handbook of Early Childhood Research

Recent decades have seen an upsurge of research with and about young children, their families and communities. The Handbook of Early Childhood Research will provide a landmark overview of the field of early childhood research and will set an agenda for early childhood research into the future. It includes 31 chapters provided by internationally recognized experts in early childhood research. The team of international contributors apply their expertise to conceptual and methodological issues in research and to relevant fields of practice and policy. The Handbook recognizes the main contexts of early childhood research: home and family contexts; out-of-home contexts such as services for young children and their families; and broader societal contexts of that evoke risk for young children.

Guerrilla Research Tactics: Alternative Research Methods in Urban Environments

This case-study examines innovative experimentation with mobile and cloud-based technologies, utilising “Guerrilla Research Tactics” (GRT), as a means of covertly retrieving data from the urban fabric. Originally triggered by participatory action research (Kindon et al., 2008) and unobtrusive research methods (Kellehear, 1993), the potential for GRT lies in its innate ability to offer researchers an alternative, creative approach to data acquisition, whilst simultaneously allowing them to engage with the public, who are active co-creators of knowledge. Key characteristics are political agenda, the unexpected and the unconventional, which allow for an interactive, unique and thought-provoking experience for both researcher and participant.

Agenda-Setting Revisited: Social Media and Sourcing in Mainstream Journalism

In political journalism, the battle over agenda-setting between journalists and their sources has been described using many metaphors and concepts. Herbert Gans saw it as a dance where the two parties competed for leadership, arguing that sources usually got the lead. We address the question of how social media, in particular Twitter, contribute to media agenda-building and agenda-setting by looking at how tweets are sourced in election campaign coverage in Australia, Norway and Sweden. Our findings show that the popularity of elite political sources is a common characteristic across all countries and media. Sourcing from Twitter reinforces the power of the political elites to set the agenda of the news media – they are indeed “still leading the dance”. Twitter content travels to the news media as opinions, comments, announcements, factual statements, and photos. Still, there are variations that must be explained both by reference to different political and cultural characteristics of the three countries, as well as by the available resources and journalistic profiles of each media outlet.

An eroding social justice agenda: The case of physical education and health edu-business in schools

In this paper we draw on current research to explore notions of a socially just Health and Physical Education (HPE), in light of claims that a neoliberal globalisation promotes markets over the states, and a new individualism that privileges self-interest over the collective good. We also invite readers to consider United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s ambition for PE in light of preliminary findings from an Australian led research project exploring national and international patterns of outsourcing HPE curricula. Data were sourced from this international research project through a mixed method approach. Each external provider engaged in four phases of research activity: (a) Web-audits, (b) Interviews with external providers, (c) Network diagrams, and (d) School partner interviews and observations. Results We use these data to pose what we believe to be three emerging lines of inquiry and challenge for a socially just school HPE within neoliberal times. In particular our data indicates that the marketization of school HPE is strengthening an emphasis on individual responsibility for personal health, elevating expectations that schools and teachers will “fill the welfare gap” and finally, influencing the nature and purchase of educative HPE programs in schools. The apparent proliferation of external providers of health work, HPE resources and services reflects the rise and pervasiveness of neoliberalism in education. We conclude that this global HPE landscape warrants attention to investigate the extent to which external providers’ resources are compatible with schooling’s educative and inclusive mandates.

Nonprofit Boards in Australia: A Distinctive Governance Appoach

This article reports the findings into patterns of governance on nonprofit boards in Australia. The research surveys 118 boards, upon which serve a total of 1405 directors. The findings indicate that nonprofit boards can mimic some aspects of a shareholder approach to governance. But nonprofit boards, in the main, indicate priorities and activities of a stakeholder approach to governance. The features of `isomorphism' that arise largely stem from legislative requirements in corporate governance. Generally, nonprofit directors are influenced by agenda and motivations that can be differentiated from the influences upon director activity in the corporate sector. The study indicates that nonprofit boards prize knowledge and loyalty to the sector when considering board composition. The survey suggests nonprofits ``compensate'' for the demands placed upon them about fiduciary duty and due diligence responsibilities with the diverse intellectual expertise of non-executive directors. Nonprofit boards possess greater diversity than boards in the corporate sector; they include more women as directors than corporate boards and they include a greater proportion of directors from minority groups. While strategic issues feature significantly as a task of the nonprofit board, they distinguish themselves from their corporate counterparts by engaging in operational management. The findings indicate that, in the main, directors on nonprofit boards deliberate and operate in ways distinctive from their corporate counterparts. Such findings offer a contribution to the reform of Corporations Law in other countries and the likely consequence on boards outside the corporate sector.