1,720,956 research outputs found
Protecting Children, Preserving Trust : Ensuring Legitimate State Interventions into Families
Get PDFDenne doktorgradsavhandlingen undersøker holdninger og tillit til barnevernssystemer – systemer som er etablerte for å beskytte barn «mens en eller begge foreldre, verge(r) eller eventuell annen person har omsorgen for barnet» (Barnekonvensjonen, artikkel 19), og forsøker å avdekke påvirkningsfaktorer og konsekvenser av folks (manglende) tillit. Den etablerte kunnskapen om tillit og holdninger til velferdsinstitusjoner er ikke tilstrekkelig for å forstå kompleksiteten i tilliten til barnevernssystemet, som skiller seg fra andre velferdsinstitusjoner da det i tillegg til å yte tjenester og assistanse kan de yte sterk makt og begrensning av frihet (som regel foreldres) for å sikre barns velferd. Tillit er avgjørende for barnevernets evne til å gjennomføre sitt samfunnsoppdrag.
Det overordnede forskningsspørsmålet jeg undersøker er: Hva er nivået av støtte og hva kjennetegner støtten til barnevernet? Dette spørsmålet undersøker jeg ved å se nærmere på 1) borgeres preferanser og vurderinger av prosedyremessige og normative standarder for beslutningstaking og politikkimplementering i barnevernet, 2) borgeres vurdering av akseptable barnevernstiltak, 3) borgeres tillit til barnevernssystemet, saksbehandlere og beslutningstakere, og 4) borgeres villighet til å handle i tråd med barnevernet.
Mangelen på studier som spesifikt undersøker tillit i barnevernet medfører både teoretiske, metodiske og praktiske bekymringer. Denne avhandlingen bidrar til å tette dette forskningsgapet gjennom en komparativ studie av borgeres tillit til barnevernssystemer i Tsjekkia, England, Finland, Norge, Polen og Romania. Jeg viser at tillit til slike institusjoner er kompleks, fordi barnevernssystemet har en dobbeltrolle som både tjenesteyter og en statlig institusjon som har makt til å utøve tvang og gripe inn i familiers private liv, og de må balansere foreldres og barns interesser. Dette skaper motstridende bekymringer, for både institusjonene og for befolkningens tillit til dem.
Til det teoretiske rammeverket henter jeg og fletter sammen perspektiver og teorier om velferdsholdninger, institusjonell tillit, legitimitet, barnevern, og barns rettigheter. Jeg forstår legitimitet som borgeres vurderinger og oppfatninger av tiltak som blir iverksatt av barnevernet. Jeg argumenterer for at slike tiltak må, for å være legitime, gjennomføres i henhold til prosedyremessige normer, spesifikt normer om upartiskhet og rettferdighet, samt verdibaserte normer om statens plikt i å beskytte barn. Vi trenger mer kunnskap om befolkningers holdninger til slike verdibaserte spørsmål.
Den empiriske analysen er basert på data fra to spørreundersøkelser som har blitt samlet inn fra representative befolkningsutvalg. En undersøkelse tar for seg Tsjekkia, England, Finland, Norge, Polen og Romania, mens den andre tar for seg Finland, Norge, Polen og Romania. Spørreundersøkelsene tar i bruk eksperimenter, inkludert en eksperimentell vignett for å undersøke effekten av spesifikke sakskarakteristikker.
Forskningsspørsmålene adresseres i fire artikler. Den første artikkelen undersøker borgeres tillit til landets barnevern. Vi forsøker å tette et hull i kunnskapen om hvordan borgere vurderer barnevernets legitimitet, ved å identifisere og undersøke fem dimensjoner av tillit til barnevernet (kompetanse, rettferdighet, respekt, ikke-diskriminering, og moralsk samstemthet). Disse dimensjonene er knyttet til hvordan borgere vurderer barnevernets bruk av makt. Noe av variasjonen i tillit mellom land forklares av hvilken type barnevernssystem landet har (systemer som er orienterte mot tjenester til familien eller systemer som er risikoorienterte). Det er også en positiv sammenheng mellom tillit og aksept for statlige inngrep. Overordnet argumenterer artikkelen for at upartiskhet og prosedyremessig rettferdighet spiller en rolle for borgeres tillit til barnevernssystemet og for aksept av inngrep.
I artikkel to spør vi hvordan grunnleggende verdier og institusjonell kontekst påvirker borgers meninger om statens rolle i å beskytte barn når foreldrene og familien ikke klarer å tilby tilstrekkelig omsorg. Med grunnleggende verdier mener vi moralske og ideologiske prinsipper eller posisjoner. Vi studerer borgeres synspunkter på tre grunnleggende verdier som vi antar at har en påvirkning på om folk er villige til å begrense foreldres frihet, og inkluderer spørsmål om beslutningstakingssituasjoner, balansering av rettigheter, og individuelt ansvar. En hypotetisk barnevernssak om en familie med to barn blir presentert for respondenter i spørreundersøkelsen, og de blir så spurt hvilke tiltak de ville anbefalt barnevernet å iverksette. De fikk fem alternativer som varierer fra ingen tiltak, til svært inngripende tiltak som begrenser foreldrenes, barnas og familiens rett til privatliv. Det er generelt sett stor enighet i at barnevernet bør gripe inn på en eller annen måte: nesten ingen av respondentene mente at barnevernet ikke burde gripe inn i det hele tatt. De grunnleggende verdiene påvirker hvordan borgene tenker om hva som bør skje med familien og hvordan staten bør beskytte barn.
I den tredje artikkelen undersøker jeg hvordan tillit til politiske og velferdsinstitusjoner påvirker borgeres villighet til å følge oppfordringer fra og handle i tråd med helsevesenet og barnevernet. Jeg spurte respondentene om de ville tatt vaksiner, eller rapportert mistanke om omsorgssvikt hvis de respektive myndighetene oppfordret til dette. Resultatene viser at borgere stort sett gjør det myndighetene oppfordrer oss til, og at tillit til helsevesenet og barnevernet øker sannsynligheten for at de handler i tråd med dem, spesielt innenfor helsevesenet. Samtidig er det større sannsynlighet for at borgerne rapporterer omsorgssvikt enn at de tar vaksine, noe jeg argumenterer at er fordi å beskytte barn er noe de aller fleste mener er viktig. Artikkelen viser til at å bygge og vedlikeholde tillit i befolkningen har viktige konsekvenser for myndighetenes evne til å beskytte barn og folkehelse.
Artikkel fire undersøker hvordan ulik tilskrivelse av individuelt ansvar og behov påvirker borgeres støtte til velferdsytelser. Gjennom et eksperiment blir respondentene presentert for en velferdsmottaker som har en sosial risikofaktor (læringsvansker, psykiske problemer, eller rusproblemer), og som har omsorg for et barn. Jeg forventer at kriteriene for å vurdere om en person fortjener å motta velferdsgoder fungerer annerledes når den som mottar eller nyter godene er et barn eller annen person med mindre autonomi, og når borgerne må vurdere (mulig) motstridende og ulike behov og ansvar for foreldrene og barnet. Resultatene viser at borgere tilskriver ansvar og behov annerledes til personer med ulike sosiale risikofaktorer, og at dette igjen påvirker støtten for velferdstjenester. Jeg finner også at bekymringer for barnets behov går foran andre vurderinger når det kommer til borgeres støtte til velferdstjenester.
Tre implikasjoner fra denne avhandlingen trekkes frem: Den første er at barns rettigheter, behov og velferd er svært fremtredende i borgers holdninger. Svarene jeg har fått fra borgere i spørreundersøkelsene står i favør barn og barns rettigheter. Respondentene uttrykker villighet til å rapportere omsorgssvikt og stor støtte for å gi velferdstjenester til personer som ikke er i stand til å ta vare på et barn. I tråd med et større samfunnsskifte mot barns rettigheter blir barns behov og velferd en legitimerende kraft for inngrep i familier og tildeling av velferdsytelser.
Den andre implikasjonen viser til positive effektene av institusjonell tillit og hvor viktig det er at vi opprettholder denne tilliten. Det er en positiv sammenheng mellom tillit til barnevernet og aksept av inngrep i familier som tiltak for å beskytte barn. I tillegg viser høyere tillit til aksept for sterkere inngrep hvor foreldres rettigheter blir begrenset enda større grad. Tillit påvirker villighet til å handle i tråd med myndighetene på en positiv måte, noe som i tur forsterker myndighetens kapasitet til å beskytte barn. Å være samstemte med barnevernet i spørsmål om rett og galt er også viktig for at man skal akseptere inngrep i de to landene som har barnesentriske barnevernssystemer, Finland og Norge. Den tredje implikasjonen handler om borgeres overveldende støtte til velferdsstaten, og dens rolle i å beskytte barn. Det er bred aksept for statens ansvar for å beskytte barn og dens autoritet til å gripe inn i den private sfæren og begrense foreldres frihet.
Jeg understreker behovet for videre forskning på faktorene som påvirker velferdsholdninger i barnevernkonteksten. Dette inkluderer et behov forskning om hvilke typer og kilder av informasjon vi bruker til meningsdannelse, betydningen av barnevernets prestasjoner, og rollen de institusjonelle strukturene, spesielt barnevernsystemets orientering, spiller i å forme våre verdier og meninger om barn, barns rettigheter og statens ansvar for å beskytte barn.This doctoral dissertation investigates public attitudes towards and trust in child protection systems - the systems that are established for protecting children "while in the care of parent(s), legal guardians(s) or any other person who has the care of the child" (UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Art. 19), and seeks to uncover causes and consequences of (the lack of) trust. What we otherwise know about trust in and attitudes to welfare institutions does not fully capture the complexity of trust in the child protection system, which differs from most other welfare institutions in that they, in addition to providing services and assistance, also have extensive coercive powers to restrict citizens’ (usually parents’) liberty in order to protect the wellbeing of a child. Trust is crucial for the functioning of child protection systems, as a basis for compliance and collaboration.
The lack of studies specifically investigating trust in child protection systems is of great theoretical, methodological, and empirical concern. The dissertation contributes towards filling gaps in the scholarship through a comparative study of citizens’ trust in child protection systems in Czechia, England, Finland, Norway, Poland, and Romania. I show that trust in these institutions is particularly complex to understand, due to the dual role of the child protection systems as service providers and state institutions with coercive power to intervene in families’ private lives, and the need to balance the interests of parents and children. This creates conflicting concerns, not only for the institutions but also for the population’s trust in them.
The overarching research question I address is: What is the level and characteristics of public support for child protection systems? This question is examined in depth by studying 1) citizens’ preferences and evaluations of procedural and normative standards for decision-making and policy implementation, 2) citizens’ evaluation of acceptable child protection measures, 3) citizens’ level of trust and confidence in the child protection system, its caseworkers and decision-makers, and 4) citizens willingness to comply with the child protection authorities.
For the theoretical framework, I draw from and integrate perspectives and theories on welfare attitudes, institutional trust and legitimacy, child protection and child rights. I understand legitimacy as citizens’ evaluations and perceptions of the measures implemented by the child protection system. I argue that, to be legitimate, these measures ought to be implemented according to procedural norms, specifically, impartiality and fairness, as well as value-based norms regarding the state’s obligation to protect children. More knowledge is needed about populations’ attitudes on such value-based questions.
The empirical analysis is based on data from two surveys collected from representative population samples. One includes the populations in Czechia, England, Finland, Norway, Poland and Romania, and the other includes Finland, Norway, Poland and Romania. The surveys incorporate between-subject experimental features, including a vignette experiment, to examine the effects of specific variables.
I address the research questions through four articles. The first article examines citizens’ confidence in the child protection system in their country. Addressing a lack of knowledge in how citizens evaluate the child protection services’ legitimacy, we identify and explore five separate aspects of confidence in the child protection system (competency, fairness, respectfulness, non-discrimination and moral alignment). These dimensions all concern the public’s perceptions of child protection services’ exercise of power. The type of child protection system implemented in a country (family service-oriented or risk-oriented) partly explains variation in the confidence levels between citizens. Moreover, there is a positive correlation between confidence and acceptance of state intervention. Overall, the paper argues that impartiality and procedural fairness matter for citizens’ confidence in the child protection system and acceptance of intervention.
In Article II, we ask how basic values and institutional context affect public opinion on the state’s responsibility for protecting children when their parents and family do not provide sufficient care. Basic values refer to moral or ideological principles or positions. We study three basic values that we expect will impact citizens’ willingness to restrict parents’ freedom. These include respondents’ views on sub-optimal decision-making situations, balancing of rights, and individual responsibility. A hypothetical child protection case about a family with two children was presented to respondents, and they were asked what actions they would recommend the child protection system to take in the situation. They were given five options, ranging from less to more intervention and restriction of parents, child, and family’s right to privacy. Overall, there is consensus that the child protection system should get involved in some way – almost no respondents recommended no involvement. Basic values and preferences shape what citizens think should happen to the family and their attitudes towards how the state should protect children.
In the third article, I examine how political and specific trust affects citizens’ compliance with healthcare and child protection authorities. I asked respondents whether they would follow a vaccination programme, or report suspicions of child maltreatment if the government asked them to. The results show that overall citizens are willing to comply with authorities and that institutional trust in healthcare or child protection authorities increases the likelihood of complying, especially in the healthcare domain. However, overall, citizens are more likely to report child maltreatment than receive vaccines and I argue that there are strong norms for protecting children within the populations. The article notes how building and preserving trust has important consequences for the effective protection of children and public health.
Article IV examines whether different levels of perceived responsibility and need affect support for services. Through a survey experiment, respondents are presented with a recipient of welfare services, who is described as having a social risk condition (learning disabilities, mental health problems, and substance misuse problems), and who cares for a child. I expect that the effects of the deservingness criteria work differently when the beneficiary or recipient of the services is a child or someone else with less autonomy than an adult, and when citizens must consider (potentially) conflicting needs and levels of responsibility between parent(s) and child. The results show that citizens attribute responsibility and need differently to different social risk groups, which furthermore determines support for services. Furthermore, I find that concern for the child’s needs is the primary consideration in citizens’ attitudes towards welfare services.
Three main implications from this thesis include: Firstly, child’s rights, needs and well-being are central to citizens’ attitudes. Citizens surveyed in this thesis evaluate normative statements about policy and principles in favour of children’s rights, they express willingness to report suspicions of maltreatment and display high levels of support to persons who are unable to care for a child. In line with a large-scale shift towards child rights, the child’s needs and well-being serve as a legitimising force of welfare state interventions and provision of services.
Secondly, the thesis demonstrates the importance of institutional trust, underscoring the importance of maintaining it. There is a positive relationship between trust and confidence in the child protection system and acceptance of child protection interventions in the family. Moreover, higher confidence is also connected to acceptance of stronger interventions where parental rights are further limited. It positively influences compliance, which strengthens the state's capacity to protect children, and normative alignment is particularly important for accepting interventions in the countries with child-centric child welfare systems, Norway and Finland. Thirdly, I find that citizens are overwhelmingly positive towards the welfare state and its role in protecting children and that there is wide acceptance of the state's responsibility and authority to intervene in the private sphere and restrict parental freedom.
I stress the need for further research on determinants of welfare attitudes in the child protection context, including a need for research on the types and sources of information we use to form opinions, the effect of child protection performance, and the role institutional structures, specifically the child protection system orientations, play in shaping our values and opinions on children, child rights, and the state’s responsibility in protecting children.Doktorgradsavhandlin
Constitutionalising Rights to Water and Sanitation: International Norm Diffusion or Local Politics?
Get PDFWater constitutes the foundation of human life. Without water, no one survives. In 2010, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 64/292 recognising the Human Right to Water and Sanitation. Subsequently, constitutionalisation of the Water and Sanitation rights has proliferated, and 31 countries have now constitutionalised the right to water and sanitation. This thesis seeks to understand the impact of this international norm development, and specifically whether and how international norm development led to the proliferation of water and sanitation in national constitutional texts. I conduct a comparative analysis of all constitutions and an in-depth study of the Kenyan constitution-making process. The comparative study finds an increase in human rights language around provisions of water and sanitation in constitutions, supporting the hypothesis of change in language over time. The case study suggests that the international norm development to some extent do influence constitutionalisation of rights to water and sanitation, confirming the second hypothesis. It also reveals other factors of influence, such as the South African constitution, local and regional human rights- and water movements, and the Kenyan people
Legitimate child protection interventions and the dimension of confidence: A comparative analysis of populations views in six European countries
Get PDFThe legitimacy of welfare state institutions is a key question in public policy research. In this study we examine population’s confidence in child protection systems, the role of institutional context and moral alignment. Analysing representative samples of survey data (N=6,043) of citizens in six European countries (Czechia, England, Finland, Norway, Poland and Romania), we find that overall people express confidence in their child protection system. Differences between populations are correlated with institutional context, i.e. the type of child protection system in place – that is, if people live in a country with a risk-oriented system or a family service-oriented system. People’s view on their moral alignment with the system (or not) only shows minor differences in support of interventions. However, a tendency towards polarisation is detected in Finland and Norway with clear differences in support of interventions that restrict parental rights: individuals who state they are in alignment with the system favour stronger interventions than those who say they are not.publishedVersio
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Get PDFWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
- …
