British Journal of Social Work (2017) 47, 68–86 doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcw078 Advance Access Publication June 22, 2016 Environmental Social Work: A Concept Analysis Sylvia Ramsay and Jennifer Boddy* Griffith University, Southport, QLD 4222, Australia *Correspondence to Jennifer Boddy, School of Human Services and Social Work, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, Parklands Drive, Southport, QLD 4222, Australia. E-mail: j.boddy@griffith.edu.au Abstract Environmental social work and related terms have been used widely to describe an approach to social work practice that is founded on ecological justice principles. However, practice applications of environmental social work are scant and there are various terms and a range of interpretations of the practice that exist. Using a concept analysis framework, we identify the attributes and characteristics of environmental social work, develop an operational definition and use a case study to illustrate the practice of environmental social work. In this way, we seek to improve clarity, consistency and understanding of environmental social work practice among educators, practitioners and researchers. In essence, environmental social work assists humanity to create and sustain a biodiverse planetary ecosystem and does this by adapting existing social work methods to promote societal change. Keywords: Social work, natural environment, ecological, green, sustainable, practice framework, community Accepted: March 2016 Introduction The number of publications that highlight the importance of integrating the natural environment into social work practice has grown exponentially. Historically, many non-Western traditions have integrated the natural environment into their world view (Coates and Besthorn, 2010; Gray and Coates, 2013; Mosher, 2010). Several authors (Kemp, 2011; # The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The British Association of Social Workers. All rights reserved. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 Environmental Social Work 69 Peeters, 2012b; Rambaree, 2013; Shaw, 2011; Smith, 2013; Zapf, 2010) assert that pioneering social work approaches of the late 1800s and early 1900s were also inherently inclusive of the environment, while others cite social memes developing from Carson’s Silent Spring (Hawkins, 2010) and ecological systems theory as placing the natural environment into social work practice (Ferreira, 2010; Ungar, 2002; Zapf, 2010). Further, international guidelines oblige social workers to take into account the natural environment (International Federation of Social Workers, 2012) while professional principles of social justice and equality compel social workers to address the crisis facing our natural environment (Dominelli, 2013a; Gray and Coates, 2012; Kemp, 2011; Schmitz et al., 2012). Despite this strong case for environmental social work, many authors have noted the relative absence of social work in recent public environmental discourse (Besthorn, 2012; Ferreira, 2010; Kemp, 2011; Norton, 2012; Peeters, 2012b; Pulla, 2013; Weber, 2012; Zapf, 2010). A lack of environmental content in social work education is illustrated by a level of environmental literacy no better than the average population (Miller and Hayward, 2014; Shaw, 2011). This may be due to the submersion of social work in an individualistic, materialistic, anthropocentric, clinical, modernist paradigm (Besthorn, 2012; Gray and Coates, 2013; Hawkins, 2010; Mosher, 2010; Zapf, 2010). Yet publications have tripled twice in the last fifteen years, suggesting a professional change. Additionally, students want more knowledge about how to engage in environmental issues (Miller and Hayward, 2014; see also McKinnon, 2013; Shaw, 2011). The mandate to be environmentally pro-active may be clear, yet application of environmental social work in practice is limited (Miller and Hayward, 2014; Norton, 2012; Shaw, 2011). Confusion or lack of clarity about what ‘environmental social work’ entails and how it is defined is likely to contribute to this gap. Different interpretations of environmental social work and a variety of related terms used to describe the concept (see Table 1) can be confusing and impede the identification of interventions to advance environmental social work. In the absence of clarity, translation of concepts into practice is unlikely. Consequently, this paper utilises a concept analysis to define ‘environmental social work’ and identify its main elements. A common understanding can benefit those entering the profession and support current practitioners to integrate environmental social work into practice. Concept analysis A concept analysis (Krathwohl, 1993) improves understanding of abstract constructs like ‘environmental social work’ by identifying its key attributes so that research and practice endeavours ‘find the concept Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 70 Sylvia Ramsay and Jennifer Boddy Table 1 Publications categorised by keyword in title Terminology Publications Green social work Broad (2008); Dominelli (2012a, 2013a, 2014); Lane (1997); LucasDarby (2011); Marlow and Van Rooyen (2001); Shaw (2011); Weber (2012) Besthorn and McMillen (2002); Stephens et al. (2010) Besthorn (2002a); Besthorn et al. (2010); Canda (2002); Coates et al. (2006); Derezotes (2009); Dylan and Coates (2012); Faver (2009); Ferreira (2010); Graham et al. (2006); Gray (2008); Gray and Coates (2013); Hanrahan (2011); Zapf (2005, 2008) Berger and Kelly (1993); Besthorn (2001, 2012a, 2013a); Besthorn and Canda (2002); Coates and Tester (2004); Greif (2003); Jones (2010, 2013); Maton (2000); McKinnon and Bay (2013); Rotabi (2007); Shaw (2008); Ungar (2002a, 2003a, 2003b) Alston (2013); Bartlett (2003); Besthorn (2002b); Besthorn and Canda (2002); Besthorn and Meyer (2010); Borrell et al. (2010); Coates (2003, 2005, 2008); Coates and Gray (2012); Colley et al. (2012); Coulter and Noss (1988); Dylan (2013); Faver (2013); Gray and Coates (2012); Gray et al. (2013b); Green and McDermott (2010); Hawkins (2010); Hayward et al. (2013); Hillman (2002); Hoff and Polack (1993); Hoff and Rogge (1996); Jarvis (2013); Jeffery (2014); Jones (2006); Kemp (2011); Lysack (2010, 2012, 2013); McKinnon (2008, 2013); Mertig and Dunlap €rhi (2002); (2001); Miller et al. (2012); Muldoon (2006); Na Norton (2012); Park (1996); Pulla (2013); Rogge (1993); Rogge and Darkwa (1996); Schmitz et al. (2013); Schmitz et al. (2012); Schmitz et al. (2010); Shepard (2013); Soine (1987); Taylor (2013); Van Rooyen (1999); Washington (1995); Woods (1998); Zapf (2010) Besthorn (2012b); Blake (2009); Carrilio (2007); Mathbor (2007); Mosher (2010); Hall (1996); Rambaree (2013); Ryan (2013); Smith (2013) Berger (1995); Besthorn and McMillen (2002); Besthorn et al. (2003); Coates and Leahy (2006); Dominelli (2011, 2012b, 2013b); Stehlik (2013); Tester (2013); Walker (2001); Wolf (2000); Gray et al. (2013a); Hare (2004); Heinsch (2012); Lichtblau (2010) Eco-feminist social work Spiritual and eco-spiritual social work Ecological social work Environmental social work Sustainable social work Other; including natural, speciesism, climate change clearly communicable and increasingly measurable’ (Olenick et al., 2010, p. 75).The purpose of this analysis was to (i) determine attributes and characteristics of environmental social work; (ii) develop an operational definition of environmental social work practice, and (iii) provide a case example illustrating the practice of environmental social work. Our analysis adopted an approach described by Rodgers (1989) recognising relativism and using an inductive literature analysis to identify: (i) the concept of interest, (ii) alternative terms and relevant uses of the concept, (iii) the literature—or data sources—for data collection, (iv) the attributes of the concept, (v) the antecedents and consequences of the concept, (vi) related concepts and (vii) a model case. We modified the approach, borrowing from Walker and Avant’s (2005) traditional method, utilising the literature to construct a composite model Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 Environmental Social Work 71 case, because published examples of environmental social work practice did not demonstrate all the concept attributes. We acknowledge that utilising antecedents and consequences implies the concept has linear causes and effects, when in fact environmental social work practices are circular and interrelated. However, it is hoped that the concept analysis presented in this paper aids the understanding of students, practitioners and researchers. Data sources A number of databases were searched, including Proquest, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, SAGE Journals Online, Wiley Online Library, and Taylor and Francis journals. A title search using the phrase ‘social work’ was combined with the following terms using Boolean logic: green, environ*, sustainab*, eco-spiritual, eco-feminis*, ecolog*. A total of 771 articles were located. After duplicates were deleted (n ¼391), 380 articles remained. Articles published before 2010 were then excluded to ensure that the definition developed in this article reflected current ideas. This resulted in 117 articles for consideration. Articles were excluded if it was clear from the title that they were unrelated to the profession of social work, did not address the natural environment, were written in a language other than English, or were newspaper articles or book reviews. While other sources may provide important insight into practice, the peer review process used in scholarly publications ensures that articles are insightful and recognised as being useful to contemporary practice. Abstracts of journal articles were reviewed and those that mentioned both social work and the natural environment were included in the review. This resulted in twenty-three articles. Further sources were located by reviewing major social work texts in this field by Dominelli (2012a) and Gray, Coates and Hetherington (2013b), and searching for articles by authors who were referenced frequently including Besthorn, Coates, Dominelli and Gray. This resulted in twenty-five articles. Using the same search terms in Google Scholar, nineteen articles were located, resulting in sixty-seven articles for full review. Data analysis Text from the articles was extracted if it examined social work practice in the natural environment. Extracts were collated and recorded using EndNote. Findings were summarised and salient antecedents, attributes and consequences uncovered through thematic clustering, that sought Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 72 Sylvia Ramsay and Jennifer Boddy both inclusiveness and utility. It is assumed that these themes reflect ideas common to environmental social work practice. The term ‘environmental social work’ was chosen in this analysis because it appears to be the most widely used term in the literature (see Table 1). Alternative terms were not excluded as analysis showed a large overlap between terms, suggesting a common discourse. Antecedents, attributes and consequences Social workers are compelled to care for the environment by higher authorities including professional associations (McKinnon, 2013; Pulla, 2013; Shaw, 2011), the United Nations (Hawkins, 2010; Smith, 2013) and, for some, God (Mosher, 2010). Deontological imperatives also support shifting practice and theory to incorporate ecological and environmental justice (Besthorn et al., 2010; Dominelli, 2012a; Dylan and Coates, 2012; Gray and Coates, 2013). Antecedents that compel social workers to adopt and act environmentally include evidence about the effects of climate change on marginalised people and awareness about the interrelationships between humans and the biosphere (Besthorn, 2012, 2013b; Besthorn and Meyer, 2010; Besthorn et al., 2010; Dominelli, 2014; Dylan, 2012; Dylan and Coates, 2012; Ferreira, 2010; Gray et al., 2013b; Gray and Coates, 2012; Hanrahan, 2011; Hawkins, 2010; Hetherington and Boddy, 2013; Schmitz et al., 2010; Zapf, 2010). Four key attributes defined environmental social work. The first of these—creative application of social work skills to environmental concepts—is an overarching characteristic of environmental social work practice. The remaining three attributes include: (i) openness to different values and ways of being or doing, (ii) a change orientation and (iii) working across boundaries and in multiple spaces. Table 2 highlights the number of articles that discuss each attribute. Creatively apply existing skills to environmental concepts All authors stated existing social work skills are useful in addressing effects and mitigating environmental degradation. Skills include empowerment, team building, community development, management, culturally competent and anti-oppressive practice, multi-level assessments, holistic interventions and relational practices (Alston, 2013; Besthorn, 2013a; Besthorn and Meyer, 2010; Borrell et al., 2010; Dominelli, 2012a; Hawkins, 2010; Rambaree, 2013; Schmitz et al., 2012; Taylor, 2013; Weber, 2012). Social workers must be political, showing leadership in development of public values and policy, and advocating for rights and justice (Besthorn, 2013b; Dylan, 2012, 2013; Dylan and Coates, 2012; Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 Environmental Social Work 73 Table 2 Number of articles that state attributes Themes Creatively apply existing skills to environmental concepts Openness to different values and ways of being or doing Shift practice, theory and values to incorporate the natural environment Learn from spirituality and indigenous cultures Incorporate the natural environment in social work education Appreciate the instrumental and innate value of non-human life Adopt a renewed change orientation Change society Critique hegemony Work across boundaries and in multiples spaces Work in multidisciplinary teams Work with communities Work with individuals No. of articles % 67 100 67 28 17 22 99 41 25 32 60 58 88 85 58 45 38 85 66 56 Kemp, 2011; Lysack, 2012; Miller et al., 2012; Norton, 2012; Peeters, 2012b; Ross, 2013; Schmitz et al., 2010). Using an ethical framework, being congruent, reflective and reflexive in practice are central (Dylan, 2013; Jones, 2010; Lucas-Darby, 2011). Thus, environmental social work requires creative application of existing social work skills to environmental issues. Openness to different values and ways of being or doing Shift practice, theory and values to incorporate the natural environment Almost all articles (99 per cent) agreed that the theoretical focus of social work must change to include the natural environment. There must be awareness amongst practitioners of humans’ interrelationship within nature and humanity’s ability to disrupt natural systems (Besthorn, 2012; Dominelli, 2013b; Faver, 2013; Gray et al., 2013b; Pulla, 2013; Zapf, 2010). Recognition of nature’s innate value and a move to ecocentrism must occur (Gray et al., 2013a; Miller and Hayward, 2014; Ryan, 2013; Stephens et al., 2010). Pursuit of equality and justice necessitates environmental equality, meaning all animals including people have equal access to safe and clean environments, respect and dignity (Alston, 2013; Dylan, 2013; Dylan and Coates, 2012; Hanrahan, 2011; Ross, 2013). Responding to natural disasters has a place (Alston, 2013; Dominelli, 2012b; Stehlik, 2013), but social work must be pro-active in preventing environmental deterioration (Colley et al., 2012; Hawkins, 2010; Heinsch, 2012; Peeters, 2012a). Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 74 Sylvia Ramsay and Jennifer Boddy Learn from spirituality and indigenous cultures Spirituality tended to be defined as being in one’s correct place within humanity and living well in that place (Coates and Besthorn, 2010; Jones, 2013; Lichtblau, 2010). Many articles (41 per cent) reported on learning from Aboriginal, Latino, Native American Indian and African traditions (Besthorn and Meyer, 2010; Dominelli, 2013b; Faver, 2013; Gray et al., 2013b; Mosher, 2010; Polack et al., 2010; Zapf, 2010). Additionally, Buddhism, Taoism, Romanticism, Collectivism and Jungian psychology were reported as helpful for developing environmental social work frameworks (Besthorn, 2012; Gray et al., 2013b; Mosher, 2010). Many authors (including Dominelli, 2012a; Dylan, 2012; Dylan and Coates, 2012; Heinsch, 2012; Lysack, 2012; McKinnon and Bay, 2013; Miller et al., 2012; Norton, 2012; Norton et al., 2013) suggested social workers could be inspired by and learn from spiritual traditions and cultural diversity. Incorporate the natural environment in social work education To promote change, it is essential that environmental values and practices are integrated throughout the curriculum (Dominelli, 2011; Dylan and Coates, 2012; Green and McDermott, 2010; Hayward et al., 2013; Jones, 2013; Kemp, 2011; Schmitz et al., 2010)—an attribute discussed in 25 per cent of articles. ‘Simplistic conceptualizations of the environment’ (Jeffery, 2014, p. 292) should be avoided by applying a critical lens and education should occur outside of formal settings, becoming part of professional development (Coates and Besthorn, 2010; Faver, 2013; Jones, 2010; McKinnon and Bay, 2013; Shepard, 2013; Stehlik, 2013). Appreciate the instrumental and innate value of non-human life All articles explicitly stated or implicitly assumed the biosphere has innate value and plays a vital role in supporting human life. Thus, social workers should move away from anthropocentricity. Additionally, 32 per cent of articles highlighted how practice is enhanced through a connection with the natural environment. For example, the natural environment can improve well-being, and give purpose, confidence, fulfilment and insight (Besthorn, 2013a; Besthorn et al., 2010; Norton et al., 2013; Hanrahan, 2011; Heinsch, 2012; Lichtblau, 2010; Lysack, 2012; Miller et al., 2012; Norton, 2012; Norton et al., 2013; Ryan, 2013; Taylor, 2013). Knowledge of instrumental benefits provides social workers with justification for environmental interventions when working within anthropogenic power structures. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 Environmental Social Work 75 Adopt a renewed change orientation Critique hegemony The neo-liberal paradigm can be so pervasive that its values are integrated, without realisation, into individual and social actions (Besthorn and Meyer, 2010; Coates and Besthorn, 2010; Jones, 2010). According to 85 per cent of articles, environmental social workers need to understand and critique this paradigm (Coates, 2005; Ferreira, 2010; Gray et al., 2013a; Green and McDermott, 2010; Hanrahan, 2011; Hawkins, 2010; Hayward et al., 2013; Jones, 2010; Lysack, 2010; Miller and Hayward, 2014; Miller et al., 2012; Peeters, 2012a; Stephens et al., 2010; Zapf, 2010). Radical and anti-oppressive practices can reveal anthropocentrism, andropocentrism, contemporalism, speciesism, somatophobia, green-washing and environmental racism (Besthorn and Meyer, 2010; Clark, 2010; Dylan, 2012; Hanrahan, 2011; Ryan, 2013; Stephens et al., 2010; Taylor, 2013; Tester, 2013). A new ecocentric narrative to counter modern and postmodern narratives must be developed (see Dylan and Coates, 2012; Jeffery, 2014; Schmitz et al., 2013). Change society According to 88 per cent of articles reviewed, societal change, from the micro to the macro level, must be initiated (Colley et al., 2012; McKinnon, 2013; Schmitz et al., 2013) to ensure environmentally destructive practices are viewed as immoral. Critiquing laws, using mass media, facilitating workshops and public forums to raise consciousness, researching alternatives, informing public debate, advising decision makers, lobbying and contributing to policy formulation advance this goal (Besthorn, 2013b; Coates, 2005; Hawkins, 2010; Lysack, 2012; Miller et al., 2012; Schmitz et al., 2012; Taylor, 2013; Zapf, 2010). Participation in social action, protests and civil disobedience (Dominelli, 2011; Dylan, 2012; Ferreira, 2010; Gray and Coates, 2012; Miller and Hayward, 2014; Shepard, 2013) and facilitating others to join such actions (Jarvis, 2013; Lichtblau, 2010; Norton et al., 2013) are required. Social workers should call on government to enact and enforce environmental safe guards, argue for limits on human population growth, promote incentives for environmental activity (Dominelli, 2012a; Hayward et al., 2013; Miller et al., 2012; Shaw, 2011) and advocate for a system that shifts from continual industrial growth to a sustainable economy (Besthorn, 2012; Coates and Gray, 2012; Dominelli, 2012a; Kemp, 2011; Lysack, 2012; Peeters, 2012b; Stephens et al., 2010). Promoting an alternative paradigm in which practices are amended to include nature Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 76 Sylvia Ramsay and Jennifer Boddy (Jarvis, 2013; Stehlik, 2013) and non-linear problem solving is required (Dominelli, 2012a; Dylan, 2012; Mosher, 2010). Dylan (2012), Faver (2013) and Ross (2013) advise monitoring and evaluating the activities of big business, critiquing ‘green-washing’, exposing exploitative multinationals and holding them responsible for their environmental damage (see also Gray and Coates, 2012; Tester, 2013). Social workers should explicitly value environmental and ecological justice (Besthorn, 2012, 2013a; Dominelli, 2012a, 2013a, 2014; Hawkins, 2010; Jarvis, 2013) and engage in a change process to create a sustainable society. Work across boundaries and in multiple spaces Work in multidisciplinary teams The development and maintenance of inter-disciplinary collaborations with cultural leaders, activists, community leaders, other professionals (Borrell et al., 2010; Norton, 2012; Shepard, 2013) and spiritual advisers (Lysack, 2012; Mosher, 2010) were suggested in 85 per cent of articles. Collaboration provides new insight, knowledge and skills (Dominelli, 2012a; Miller and Hayward, 2014; Schmitz et al., 2013) needed to solve current, complex problems (Faver, 2013; Green and McDermott, 2010; Hawkins, 2010; Lysack, 2010). Work with communities Working to develop and support communities, sharing local knowledge and resources can develop strength, resilience and overcome environmental problems (Jones, 2010; Lichtblau, 2010; Rambaree, 2013; Schmitz et al., 2010)—a view shared in 66 per cent of the articles. Interventions need to educate, mobilise and support community activism, establish alliances and help build capacity for community initiatives such as food cooperatives, combined purchase power for fuel or new technologies, cohousing, permaculture and local production (Dylan, 2012; Gray and Coates, 2013; Norton, 2012; Norton et al., 2013; Peeters, 2012a; Polack et al., 2010; Rambaree, 2013; Schmitz et al., 2012; Shepard, 2013; Weber, 2012). This will provide an antidote to the materialism and individualism of capitalism (Coates and Besthorn, 2010; Ferreira, 2010; Peeters, 2012b; Polack et al., 2010). Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 Environmental Social Work 77 Work with individuals Over half the articles (56 per cent) examined the practice of working with individuals, helping individuals gain skills that enable them to reduce their environmental footprint and care for themselves and the environment (Besthorn, 2013a; Dominelli, 2011, 2012a, 2013a, 2013b, 2014; Dylan, 2013; Faver, 2013; Heinsch, 2012; Rambaree, 2013). Individuals need assistance to accept and reclaim their interconnection and dependence on the natural world (Dylan and Coates, 2012; Gray et al., 2013a; Hanrahan, 2011; Jones, 2010; McKinnon and Bay, 2013; Schmitz et al., 2010; Shaw, 2011) and language to describe environmental concepts (Gray et al., 2013b; Lysack, 2010). Consequences Ultimately, environmental social workers are seeking to create a society in which ecological and social justice are valued and humans live in harmony with ecosystems. Adopting the attributes of environmental social work will create this vision, and also increase professional integrity (Besthorn et al., 2010; Dylan, 2012; Hayward et al., 2013; Lysack, 2012). It will help fulfil objectives of social justice, anti-oppression and equality, ensuring human well-being and survival (Gray and Coates, 2013; Gray et al., 2013a; Jarvis, 2013; Jones, 2013; Lysack, 2013). Environmental social work promotes human well-being, compassion and an understanding of systemic discrimination, and values the innate qualities of other animals, recognising their moral right to exist (Ryan, 2013). According to Norton et al. (2013), interaction with the natural world gives zest to life—a sense of purpose, confidence, empowerment and fulfilment. Self-insight, authenticity, sensitivity and knowledge are increased, assisting personal and professional development (Miller et al., 2012; Norton, 2012). Interaction with nature improves physical, cognitive, emotional and spiritual well-being (Lichtblau, 2010; Lysack, 2012). Nature gives aesthetic pleasure and a space for socialisation, social cohesion and the development of community (Besthorn, 2013a; Besthorn et al., 2010; Norton et al., 2013). Connecting with other animals also assists individuals to overcome distress and provides awareness of ecosystem ill-health (Hanrahan, 2011; Heinsch, 2012; Taylor, 2013). Working across boundaries and in multiples spaces will help people individually and collectively reduce their environmental footprint, while caring for themselves (see e.g. Alston, 2013; Besthorn, 2013a; Coates and Besthorn, 2010; Dominelli, 2012a; Gray and Coates, 2013) and enables people to act in compassionate ways, minimising the suffering of all life forms. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 78 Sylvia Ramsay and Jennifer Boddy Concept definition and model case Environmental social work assists humanity to create and maintain a biodiverse planetary ecosystem. Core social work values, skills and knowledge can be adapted to promote social change, helping practitioners to respond to and mitigate environmental degradation. The case below fits a community approach to environmental social work practice. We expect that social workers will use professional discretion to apply the attributes to other situations. For example, while many workers are focused on immediate concerns related to housing, health, child protection, poverty and so on, it is important to be mindful that the magnitude of these issues is compounded by environmental degradation. The health and well-being of clients can be improved by incorporating the natural environment into practice. The process can begin by being open to different values and ways of being or doing—an attribute that concentrates on growing self-awareness. Practitioners can focus on learning from other cultures, appreciating the value of other life forms, being aware of the ways the natural environment supports life and making choices congruent with environmental social work in their personal lives. By critiquing the hegemony and modifying interventions, front line workers can help change society to become inclusive and sustainable. The case provided elucidates practice that is cognisant of the natural environment and highlights the attributes of environmental social work: Maree, a rural social worker, thought her clients were uninterested in the natural environment. She realised, after reflecting on clients’ stories, that they displayed aspects of biophilia—that is, an instinctive connection between humans and other living systems. Many residents reminisced about life before the local river was diverted by a dam. Stories were often censored by a prevailing attitude that loss of nature was inevitable. This prompted Maree to investigate the effect of development on the environment and the health and well-being of communities. Using her interpersonal skills, Maree created a space for people to explore their experiences, so as to validate and normalise concern for nature. Subsequently, a small group formed to document and explore the re-establishment of local biodiversity. Drawing from skills in group facilitation, Maree worked with the group to promote cohesion, shared purpose, trust and problem-solving abilities. She also assisted the group to engage with political representatives, educate others, and interact with traditional and online media. Members of the group became community change champions, writing to the local paper, establishing and monitoring social media accounts, and speaking at the school—actions that stimulated other locals to acknowledge the importance of the environment. Over time, Maree noticed a cultural shift in the town, as it became common for residents to express appreciation for nature. Maree also Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 Environmental Social Work 79 facilitated discussion between farmers and the indigenous community about the land, modelling respect and valuing difference, while highlighting a commonality of purpose around stewardship of nature. Like many, Maree found this growing collaboration broadened her understanding of nature. When the town’s green space was threatened, members of the community challenged the proposal. Maree contacted and compiled responses from diverse professions, and assisted individuals to draft submissions about the proposed development impacts. As officials failed to respond to these and other measures, including petitions and rallies, community outrage increased. Local citizens, including Maree, decided to occupy the green space to halt development and raise a media profile. Maree also supported the campaigns of like-minded political candidates at the council election, and their success led to changes in local planning laws to protect public green space. Maree joined a national coalition of environmental groups campaigning to strengthen laws ensuring environmental and social impacts are considered before federal or state governments approve developments. Maree also began mentoring other social workers to incorporate the natural environment into their practice and helped develop education materials for students, including podcasts and online modules, about environmental social work. Maree’s activism and leadership thus influenced practice, policy and political change. This model case illustrated a way to apply the attributes of environmental social work. As environmental social work emphasises responsiveness to local need, the social worker began with openness to new ideas, adapting her practice as community needs were identified. Within a safe space, community members came to see the value of the natural environment and became more motivated to learn and care about their bioregion. The social worker supported community members to become more ecocentric. The social worker used her existing skills to build alliances and strengthen community action, while she continued to learn about her own cultural influences. She pursued opportunities to shape decisions at individual, community, governmental and international levels and the social work profession. She utilised change tools within the system, such as education, submissions and electioneering, while also promoting change through civil disobedience. Over time, the community began to shift away from the dominant neo-liberal paradigm, creating opportunities for future change towards a more sustainable way of life. Discussion At present, environmental social work differs from other social work because, as shown in Figure 1, it places the ecosystem at the centre of Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 80 Sylvia Ramsay and Jennifer Boddy Figure 1 Environmental social work practice practice rather than a person—an idea referred to as ecocentrism. A strong argument made throughout the literature is that sustaining ecosystems and ecocentrism must become mainstream social work practice. As highlighted in Figure 1, social workers must adapt their existing social work skills to new areas of practice while remaining intellectually open and working in multiple spaces. The work will also include creating extensive social change. Despite common themes in the literature, highlighted in Figure 1, there is some divergence. In particular, some authors focus more on the innate value of non-human life while others focus on its instrumental value. Such a difference should be expected, because both cognitive and social change tend to be evolutionary processes (Gray and Coates, 2013; Green and McDermott, 2010; Miller, Hayward and Shaw, 2012). The literature moves from anthropocentric, instrumental views of nature, to the awareness and practice of reciprocal ecocentrism. There are also a number of gaps in the literature. For example, there are few examples about how environmental social work practice has been implemented other than in social work education. It will be important for practitioners to develop their practice, test methods developed by other professions, and begin establishing a robust research, theory and practice base in this area. This will involve both the development of Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 Environmental Social Work 81 content knowledge, such as knowledge of ecology, and process knowledge, such as the use of social media and information technology. Creating change will be challenged by difficulties in prioritising environmental issues, the demoralisation of social workers in many parts of the world and the dominance of neo-liberalism. Finding a balance between the obligation to create widespread social and environmental change and social work’s commitment to protecting minority groups, while also respecting the right of individual self-determination, will be difficult. Such dilemmas are not new, but they require dedicated detailed critical analysis that is mindful of social work values and the interconnected nature of human health and well-being with the natural environment. While more work needs to be undertaken to clarify how workers can negotiate such issues, social workers must avoid accepting the status quo and instead think creatively about addressing environmental challenges. For example, social workers could undertake aspirational thought experiments, such as striving to emulate the unconditional love displayed by some animals (Hanrahan, 2011), implementing non-human animal rights (Ryan, 2013; Taylor, 2013), or engaging in activism against capitalism (Dylan and Coates, 2012). It is likely that those advocating for the type of systemic change envisaged by environmental social work may find themselves in vulnerable, isolated situations. Professional bodies should offer support to members in such situations. Social workers may also draw on nature itself (Heinsch, 2012; Lichtblau, 2010), allies from other disciplines (Lysack, 2012) and experiences of past pioneers, such as women’s suffrage, civil rights, peace activists and progressive labour unions, to help maintain morale for promoting a sustainable, ecocentric world. Another challenge for social workers will entail maintaining momentum and grassroots support for interventions when trying to operate within bureaucratic systems. Bureaucracy can be particularly slow when implementing innovations (Weber, 2012). It will be important for social workers to maintain connections within and outside the discipline to support innovation, while sustaining social change. Social workers may do this, in part, by drawing from social media and online communities. The profession’s tradition of borrowing from other disciplines should be maintained (Brekke, 2012; Jarvis, 2013; Jeffery, 2014; Miller and Hayward, 2014) while expanding the fields referenced to include knowledge and practices informed by environmental sciences such as biology, climatology, geology and ecology. Being informed by a variety of perspectives is a strength when addressing complex issues such as climate change, loss of biodiversity, food security and access to fresh water that environmental social work will face. A clear definition of environmental social work will allow social workers to recognise the aspects of other disciplines that would further the goals of environmental social work, Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 82 Sylvia Ramsay and Jennifer Boddy such as counselling (Greenleaf et al., 2014), teaching (Lysack, 2009), politics (Litfin, 2013) and business (Vickers and Lyon, 2012). Limitations Though extensive, the literature review did not include all publications, such as those in languages other than English, so important ideas may have been omitted. This review also favours academic knowledge—an approach justified by the modern positivist paradigm which has been critiqued for its exclusion and oppression of many groups including women, children, non-human animals and the natural world (Gray and Coates, 2012). The concept analysis was biased to the views of authors with multiple publications and, as the authors were unable to give feedback on the summarised themes, we made subjective assessments on the most important themes that the authors of the original publications may not agree with. Conclusion This paper identified and explained the key attributes of environmental social work, and then used these attributes to illustrate what the practice of environmental social work is through a case study. Environmental social work is focused on helping humanity create and maintain a biodiverse planetary ecosystem which includes humans. A clear definition of environmental social work will solidify the foundations of this approach and encourage practical implementation of the attributes and values. It can help social workers to broaden and strengthen practices by knowing which ideas to incorporate from other academic disciplines and other forms of knowledge. References Alston, M. (2013) ‘Environmental social work: Accounting for gender in climate disasters’, Australian Social Work, 66(2), pp. 218–33. Besthorn, F. H. (2012) ‘Deep ecology’s contributions to social work: A ten-year retrospective’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 21(3), pp. 248–59. Besthorn, F. H. (2013a) ‘Radical equalitarian ecological justice’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Evironmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge, pp. 31–45. Besthorn, F. H. (2013b) ‘Vertical farming: Social work and sustainable urban agriculture in an age of global food crises’, Australian Social Work, 66(2), pp. 187–203. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 Environmental Social Work 83 Besthorn, F. H. and Meyer, E. E. (2010) ‘Environmentally displaced persons: Broadening social work’s helping imperative’, Critical Social Work, 11(3), pp. 123–38. Besthorn, F. H., Wulff, D. and St George, S. (2010) ‘Eco-spiritual helping and postmodern therapy: A deeper ecological framework’, Ecopsychology, 2(1), pp. 23–32. Borrell, J., Lane, S. and Fraser, S. (2010) ‘Integrating environmental issues into social work practice: Lessons learnt from domestic energy auditing’, Australian Social Work, 63(3), pp. 315–28. Brekke, J. S. (2012) ‘Shaping a science of social work’, Research on Social Work Practice, 22(5), pp. 455–64. Clark, C. (2010) ‘Social work and the environment: Understanding people and place’, International Social Work, 53(6), pp. 844–5. Coates, J. (2005) ‘The environmental crisis: Implications for social work’, Journal of Progressive Human Services, 16(1), pp. 25–49. Coates, J. and Besthorn, F. H. (2010) ‘Building bridges and crossing boundaries: Dialogues in professional helping’, Critical Social Work, 11(3), pp. 1–7. Coates, J. and Gray, M. (2012) ‘The environment and social work: An overview and introduction’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 21(3), pp. 230–8. Colley, T., Burgin, S., Webb, T. and Bassett, H. (2012) ‘Defining eco-social capacity building and its evaluation: A case study in environmental community engagement in western Sydney’, Third Sector Review, 18(1), p. 29. Dominelli, L. (2011) ‘Climate change: Social workers’ roles and contributions to policy debates and interventions’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 20(4), pp. 430–8. Dominelli, L. (2012a) Green Social Work: From Environmental Crises to Environmental Justice, Cambridge, Polity. Dominelli, L. (2012b) ‘Mind the gap: Built infrastructures, sustainable caring relations, and resilient communities in extreme weather events’, Australian Social Work, 66(2), pp. 204–17. Dominelli, L. (2013a) ‘Environmental justice at the heart of social work practice: Greening the profession’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 22(4), pp. 431–9. Dominelli, L. (2013b) ‘Social work education for disaster relief work’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Dominelli, L. (2014) ‘Promoting environmental justice through green social work practice: A key challenge for practitioners and educators’, International Social Work, 57(4), pp. 338–45. Dylan, A. (2012) ‘Rethinking sustainability on planet Earth: A time for new framings’, Electronic Green Journal, 1(34), pp. 1–16. Dylan, A. (2013) ‘Environmental sustainability, sustainable development and social work’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Dylan, A. and Coates, J. (2012) ‘The spirituality of justice: Bringing together the eco and the social’, Journal of Religion & Spirituality in Social Work: Social Thought, 31(1–2), pp. 128–49. Faver, C. A. (2013) ‘Environmental beliefs and concern about animal welfare: Exploring the connections’, Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 40(4), p. 149. Ferreira, S. B. (2010) ‘Eco-spiritual social work as a precondition for social development’, Ethics and Social Welfare, 4(1), pp. 3–23. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 84 Sylvia Ramsay and Jennifer Boddy Gray, M. and Coates, J. (2012) ‘Environmental ethics for social work: Social work’s responsibility to the non-human world’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 21(3), pp. 239–47. Gray, M. and Coates, J. (2013) ‘Changing values and valuing change: Toward an ecospiritual perspective in social work’, International Social Work, 56(3), pp. 356–68. Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (2013a) ‘Conclusion’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (2013b) ‘Overview of the last ten years and typology of ESW’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Green, D. and McDermott, F. (2010) ‘Social work from inside and between complex systems: Perspectives on person-in-environment for today’s social work’, British Journal of Social Work, 40(8), pp. 2414–30. Greenleaf, A. T., Bryant, R. M. and Pollock, J. B. (2014) ‘Nature-based counseling: Integrating the healing benefits of nature into practice’, International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 36(2), pp. 162–74. Hanrahan, C. (2011) ‘Challenging anthropocentricism in social work through ethics and spirituality: Lessons from studies in human–animal bonds’, Journal of Religion & Spirituality in Social Work: Social Thought, 30(3), pp. 272–93. Hawkins, C. (2010) ‘Sustainability, human rights, and environmental justice: Critical connections for contemporary social work’, Critical Social Work, 11(3), pp. 68–81. Hayward, R. A., Miller, S. E. and Shaw, T. V. (2013) ‘Social work education on the environment in contemporary curricula in the USA’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Heinsch, M. (2012) ‘Getting down to earth: Finding a place for nature in social work practice’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 21(3), pp. 309–18. Hetherington, T. and Boddy, J. (2013) ‘Ecosocial work with marginalized populations’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. International Federation of Social Workers (2012) Policy on Globalisation and the Environment, available online at http://ifsw.org/policies/globalisation-and-the-envi ronment/. Jarvis, D. (2013) ‘Environmental justice and social work: A call to expand the social work profession to include environmental justice’, Columbia Social Work Review, 4(1), pp. 26–45. Jeffery, D. (2014) ‘Environmentalism in social work: What shall we teach?’, Affilia, 29(4), pp. 492–8. Jones, P. (2010) ‘Responding to the ecological crisis: Transformative pathways for social work education’, Journal of Social Work Education, 46(1), pp. 67–84. Jones, P. (2013) ‘Transforming the curriculum: Social work education and ecological consciousness’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Kemp, S. P. (2011) ‘Recentring environment in social work practice: Necessity, opportunity, challenge’, British Journal of Social Work, 41(6), pp. 1198–210. Krathwohl, D. R. (1993) Methods of Educational and Social Science Research: An Integrated Approach, Boston, Longman/Addison Wesley Longman. Lichtblau, D. (2010) ‘Learning from the fields: Reflection on experience in the outdoors as professional development’, Critical Social Work, 11(3), pp. 9–28. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 Environmental Social Work 85 Litfin, K. (2013) ‘From me to we to thee: Ecovillages and the transition to integral community’, Social Sciences Directory, 2(5), pp. 154–69. Lucas-Darby, E. T. (2011) ‘The new color is green: Social work practice and servicelearning’, Advances in Social Work, 12(1), pp. 113–25. Lysack, M. (2009) ‘The teach in on golbal warming solutions and Vygotski: Fostering ecological action and environmental citizenship’, McGill Journal of Education (Online), 44(1), pp. 119–34. Lysack, M. (2010) ‘Environmental decline, loss, and biophilia: Fostering commitment in environmental citizenship’, Critical Social Work, 11(3), pp. 48–66. Lysack, M. (2012) ‘Building capacity for environmental engagement and leadership: An ecosocial work perspective’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 21(3), pp. 260–9. Lysack, M. (2013) ‘Emotion, ethic and fostering committed environmental citizenship’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. McKinnon, J. (2013) ‘The environment: A private concern or a professional practice issue for Australian social workers?’, Australian Social Work, 66(2), pp. 156–70. McKinnon, J. and Bay, U. (2013) ‘Social work enabling sustainable ecological living’, Australian Social Work, 66(2), pp. 153–5. Miller, S. E. and Hayward, R. A. (2014) ‘Social work education’s role in addressing people and a planet at risk’, Social Work Education, 33(3), pp. 280–95. Miller, S. E., Hayward, R. A. and Shaw, T. V. (2012) ‘Environmental shifts for social work: A principles approach’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 21(3), pp. 270–7. Mosher, C. R. (2010) ‘A wholistic paradigm for sustainability: Are social workers experts or partners’, Critical Social Work, 11(3), pp. 102–21. Norton, C. L. (2012) ‘Social work and the environment: An ecosocial approach’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 21(3), pp. 299–308. Norton, C. L., Holguin, B. and Manos, J. (2013) ‘Restoration not incarceration’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Olenick, M., Allen, L. R. and Smego, R. A. Jr (2010) ‘Interprofessional education: A concept analysis’, Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 1, pp. 75–84. Peeters, J. (2012a) ‘A comment on “Climate change: Social workers’ roles and contributions to policy debates and interventions”’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 21(1), pp. 105–7. Peeters, J. (2012b) ‘The place of social work in sustainable development: Towards ecosocial practice’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 21(3), pp. 287–98. Polack, R., Wood, S. and Smith, K. (2010) ‘An analysis of fossil-fuel dependence in the United States with implications for community social work’, Critical Social Work, 11(3), pp. 359–75. Pulla, V. (2013) ‘Critical essay: Environmentalism and social work’, Rural Society, 22(3), pp. 263–8. Rambaree, K. (2013) ‘Social work and sustainable development: Local voices from Mauritius’, Australian Social Work, 66(2), pp. 261–76. Rodgers, B. L. (1989) ‘Concepts, analysis and the development of nursing knowledge: The evolutionary cycle’, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 14(4), pp. 330–5. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 86 Sylvia Ramsay and Jennifer Boddy Ross, D. (2013) ‘Social work and the struggle for coporate social responsibility’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Ryan, T. (2013) ‘Social work, animals, and the natural world’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Schmitz, C. L., Maty ok, T., James, C. D. and Sloan, L. M. (2013) ‘Environmental sustainability: Educating social workers for interdisplinary practice’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Schmitz, C. L., Maty ok, T., Sloan, L. M. and James, C. D. (2012) ‘The relationship between social work and environmental sustainability: Implications for interdisciplinary practice’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 21(3), pp. 278–86. Schmitz, C. L., Stinson, C. H. and James, C. D. (2010) ‘Community and environmental sustainability: Collaboration and interdisciplinary education’, Critical Social Work, 11(3), pp. 83–100. Shaw, T. V. (2011) ‘Is social work a green profession? An examination of environmental beliefs’, Journal of Social Work, 13(1), pp. 3–29. Shepard, B. (2013) ‘Community gardens, creative, community organizing and environmental activism’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Smith, R. J. (2013) ‘A social worker’s report from the united nations conference on sustainable development (Rio þ 20)’, Social Work, 58(4), pp. 369–72. Stehlik, D. (2013) ‘Social work practice with drought affected families’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Stephens, A., Jacobson, C. and King, C. (2010) ‘Towards a feminist-systems theory’, Systemic Practice and Action Research, 23(5), pp. 371–86. Taylor, S. (2013) ‘Social science research in ocean environments’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Tester, F. (2013) ‘Climate change as a human rights issue’, in Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds), Environmental Social Work, Oxon, Routledge. Ungar, M. (2002) ‘A deeper, more social ecological social work practice’, Social Service Review, 76(3), pp. 480–97. Vickers, I. and Lyon, F. (2012) ‘Beyond green niches? Growth strategies of environmentally-motivated social enterprises’, International Small Business Journal, 31, pp. 1–22. Walker, L. O. and Avant, K. C. (2005) Strategies for Theory Construction in Nursing, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Pearson Prentice Hall. Weber, B. A. (2012) ‘Social work and the challenges of the green economy’, Advances in Social Work, 13(2), pp. 391–407. Zapf, M. K. (2010) ‘Social work and the environment: Understanding people and place’, Critical Social Work, 11(3), pp. 30–46. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bjsw/article-abstract/47/1/68/2622336 by University of Calgary user on 12 January 2018 Journal of Social Work Education ISSN: 1043-7797 (Print) 2163-5811 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uswe20 The Place of Place in Social Work: Rethinking the Person-in-Environment Model in Social Work Education and Practice Bree Akesson, Victoria Burns & Shawn-Renee Hordyk To cite this article: Bree Akesson, Victoria Burns & Shawn-Renee Hordyk (2017) The Place of Place in Social Work: Rethinking the Person-in-Environment Model in Social Work Education and Practice, Journal of Social Work Education, 53:3, 372-383 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2016.1272512 Published online: 24 Mar 2017. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 333 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uswe20 Download by: [University of Calgary] Date: 03 January 2018, At: 15:43 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION 2017, VOL. 53, NO. 3, 372–383 https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2016.1272512 The Place of Place in Social Work: Rethinking the Person-in-Environment Model in Social Work Education and Practice Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 15:43 03 January 2018 Bree Akesson , Victoria Burns, and Shawn-Renee Hordyk ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY Social work’s traditional emphasis on the individual in the context of social environments has resulted in a neglect of the person in the context of physical environments. This conceptual article addresses this oversight by presenting three subconcepts of place—place attachment, place identity, and territoriality—and draws on research examples with marginalized populations to illustrate the possibilities for understanding and integrating these concepts into social work. We ultimately argue for a shift toward an emphasis on place as a fresh avenue of inquiry to broaden and enhance social work education and practice. Accepted: November 2015 Over the past 40 years, the geographic concept of place has become a conceptual building block in various social science disciplines, including urban sociology, environmental psychology, environmental gerontology, and anthropology, and their applied disciplines, such as urban planning, housing studies, and architecture. The concept of place has been conceptualized through two main perspectives: a phenomenological approach of place and a social constructionist approach to place (Cresswell, 2004). A phenomenological approach of place is concerned less with studying specific places and more with the subjective meanings, emotions, and the embodied experience tied to place (Cresswell, 2004). For many phenomenological scholars of place, home is the ideal place, as it provides a sense of comfort, security, and belonging (Proshansky, Fabian, & Kaminoff, 1983; Relph, 1976; Tuan, 1974). On the other hand, a social constructionist approach to place considers how underlying sociopolitical processes related to power (i.e., capitalism, ageism, political violence) shape individual experiences with place (Cresswell, 1996; Harvey, 1996; Massey, 1997). Although the person-in-environment model is a hallmark of the social work profession (Cornell, 2006), those in social work do not have a solid understanding of place as a significant concept in education and practice. Therefore, through this conceptual article, we aim to reveal place as a concept that is highly relevant and important to education and practice. After situating the concept of place within the history of social work, we demonstrate how three interrelated subconcepts of place—place attachment, place identity, and territoriality—are useful theoretical tools in the social work milieu. We use examples from three social work research projects with older homeless adults, immigrant families, and war-affected children and families to illustrate the utility of these three subconcepts of place. Ultimately, we contend that the concept of place provides a novel interdisciplinary lens to view social work issues and is a promising theoretical tool to reenvision social work’s trademark person-in-environment model. CONTACT Bree Akesson bakesson@wlu.ca Lyle S. Hallman Faculty of Social Work, Wilfrid Laurier University, 120 Duke Street West, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada, N2H 3W8. © 2017 Council on Social Work Education JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION 373 Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 15:43 03 January 2018 Place in the history of social work Although the geographical concept of place has received scant attention in the field of social work, the related concept of the environment has been the hallmark of the discipline. (Cornell, 2006), with social work’s commitment to the person-in-environment perspective distinguishing itself from other helping professions. The environmental perspective is considered to be the foundation of social work (Janchill, 1969), a “conceptual umbrella” under which social work practice has developed (Meyer, 1983, p. 5), and a pillar of social work theory (Goldstein, 2009). Since the birth of the social work profession at the turn of the 20th century, the environment, thinly conceptualized at the time as anything outside the individual, was a central concern for social workers (Strom-Gottfried, 2002). Notably, Mary Richmond (1917) highlighted the interdependence of people and environment through the systematic collection of detailed data regarding an individual’s environment, such as the family and other factors outside the family known as “social evidence” (Richmond, 1917, p. 38). However, by the late 1920s and continuing through the 1970s, the concept of person in environment was eclipsed by evolving theories related to individual functioning (Strom-Gottfried, 2002). Although social work theorists did not entirely exclude the environment from their formulations, it was only marginally included. This emphasis on the individual was more a result of social work’s reliance on psychological developmental theories, whereas geographical theories relating to place were far less common. The 1970s ushered in greater interest and emphasis on the environment with social work scholars such as Germain (1973), Meyer (1970), and Siporin (1975) advocating for models of social work that placed primary emphasis on systems and ecological theories. Yet, since the 1970s, social work has taken a myopic view of the role of physical place in social work, reflecting challenges within the profession to redefine itself (Rogge & Cox, 2001). Although some scholars have recognized that social work needs to move beyond the social environment, for example, by acknowledging the natural environment (Zapf, 2009), the current social work discourse either ignores the concept and meaning of place in social work or emphasizes the social environment over the physical environment (Coates, 2003; McKinnon, 2008; Närhi, 2004; Zapf, 2009). In this way, the physical environment effectively becoming a present absence, or that which is ubiquitous yet receives scant attention. In fact, current social work trends tend to dichotomize the physical environment into social and physical spheres rather than acknowledging the dynamic and reciprocal interaction between people and place. There is ambivalence and disagreement over what the person-in-environment model means, how it should be integrated into social work practice and education, and if it should even be social work’s signature concept (Rogge & Cox, 2001). Those in favor of the person-in-environment model as a central social work tenet suggest that it provides a holistic framework to understand personenvironment interactions, whereas opponents assert that the person in environment is too broad a notion to guide social work practice (Probst, 2012). This tension about the definition, utility, and operationalization of the concept of place in social work hinders meaningful discussions about how we can best use the concept of place to enhance social work education and practice with diverse and often marginalized populations. A brief overview of three subconcepts of place Before providing examples of the utility of the concept of place in social work, this section introduces three subconcepts of place—place attachment, place identity, and territoriality—relevant to social work education and practice. In recognizing there is ample crossover work (Fullilove, 2014; Manzo & Devine-Wright, 2014; Moore, 2000), the first two concepts (place attachment and place identity) have largely been developed from the phenomenological approach of place, whereas territoriality comes from the social constructionist approach to place. These concepts have received extensive theoretical and empirical attention in other social science fields including sociology and psychology. However, they have received little consideration in the field of social work. 374 B. AKESSON ET AL. Place attachment and place identity Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 15:43 03 January 2018 The concepts of place attachment and place identity have been central to the phenomenological approach of place. For Tuan (1974b), everyday involvement with particular physical places over time leads to attachments to place, what Tuan called “topophilia,” literally meaning the love of place. Echoing Tuan’s conceptualizations of place, Relph (1976) contends that place attachment is just as important as attachment to people, as it addresses the fundamental need of human belonging. Relph argues that this sense of belonging occurs when one feels securely attached and rooted in a physical place. Conversely, those who feel no attachment to a place may experience placelessness (Relph, 1976). Feeling securely attached to place is also considered a necessary requirement for maintaining a positive sense of self, or what Altman and Low (1992) refer to as place identity. Specifically, they contend, Place attachment may contribute to the formation, maintenance, and preservation of the identity of a person, group, or culture. And, it may also be that place attachment plays a role in fostering individual, group, and cultural self-esteem, self-worth, and self-pride. (p. 10) The concept of place identity captures the importance of one’s physical environment in the development of individual and collective identities. Memories, thoughts, values, emotions, and meanings are inseparable from the everyday physical environments in which they occur (Proshansky et al., 1983). This weaving of place and self gives rise to individual place identities. Collective identities, on the other hand, emerge from the discursive coconstructions concerning place and the unique cultural, historical, and political factors contributing to the meanings one attaches to place (Dixon & Durrheim, 2000). Place identities often remain unexamined unless there is change, such as that brought on by migration. Territoriality In addition to identity and attachment, underlying notions of power contribute to the concept of place. In the human geography literature, power often refers to inherent power dynamics within a physical space (Harvey, 1973; Massey, 1993). A discussion about politics and power and their relationship to place cannot be isolated from the concept of territoriality (Sack, 1983, 1986). Territoriality is a spatial process for claiming and controlling a geographical area, including its people and resources. According to Sack (1986), territoriality is “related to how people use land, how they organize themselves in space and how they give meanings to place” (p. 2). Territoriality has a psychological benefit for individuals and groups, playing a critical role in the development of a sense of security (Uzzell, 1990). Territoriality leads to a greater identification with home and the local community as a place of sanctuary, resulting in a perception of having more control over the environment. Lang (1987) confirms that territories fulfill the basic human needs for security, identity, and stimulation. A strong sense of territoriality becomes a means of establishing and maintaining one’s sense of identity related to place (Ittelson, 1974). Drawing on excerpts and examples from three research projects, the next section illustrates how these three subconcepts—place attachment, place identity, and territoriality—are portrayed in different marginalized populations. The concept of place in social work research: Three examples from the field Emphasizing the dynamic, reciprocal, and interactive relationship between people and place (Massey, 1994; Relph, 1976), this section explores the application of the three subconcepts of place. Each of these subconcepts are further illustrated using examples from different research projects with marginalized populations. To clarify the subconcept of place attachment, the first JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION 375 research example describes the experiences of newly homeless older adults (NHOAs) compared to the chronically homeless living in an urban Canadian setting (Burns, 2015). The second research example draws on research with newly immigrant families also living in an urban Canadian setting to further explain the subconcept of place identity (Hordyk, 2014). Providing illustrations of the subconcept of territoriality, the third research example explores the concept and meaning of place for war-affected children and families living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem (Akesson, 2014b). All three research projects received relevant ethics approval. The following three sections do not present the full findings of these studies. Rather, concepts and quotations are used to illustrate the relevance of the different subconcepts of place when working with these marginalized populations. It is our hope that these examples will broaden the understanding of those in social work of the relevance and importance of place in the lives of marginalized populations. Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 15:43 03 January 2018 Differing experiences of place attachment among older homeless adults in an urban context Countless scholarly articles have claimed that the immediate environment becomes more significant in old age as social networks and mobility tend to decrease, making one’s home and neighborhood the main sites for identity and belonging (Guest & Wierzbicki, 1999; Peace, Holland, & Kellaher, 2006; Peace, Wahl, Mollenkopf, & Oswald, 2007; Rowles, 1983). A prevalent notion is that an older adult’s sense of security, comfort, autonomy, and well-being is directly related to feeling securely attached to place, which is most often one’s private home and surrounding neighborhood (Burns et al., 2012; Wiles, Leibing, Guberman, & Allen, 2011). Such assumptions implicitly underpin the current “aging in place” (p. 357) policy and practice models that are based on the idea that people become increasingly attached to their homes and prefer to remain in place for as long as possible (Wiles, Leibing, Guberman, Reeve, & Allen, 2011). One of the most widespread theories of place attachment for older adults was developed by Rowles (1978, 1983) who conceptualized place attachment across three dimensions of insideness: physical, social, and autobiographical. For Rowles (1983), physical insideness is associated with living somewhere for long periods of time; the resident establishes a sense of environmental control or mastery by creating an idiosyncratic rhythm and routine. Social insideness evolves not only from everyday social exchanges and relationships but also from a sense of being well-known and knowing others. Third, autobiographical insideness has been suggested to be the most relevant to describe older people’s attachment to place because it is embedded in memories. Through the process of aging, these memories are recalled selectively in the creation of one’s identity. Older people with strong ties to place are also reported to feel more in control and more secure and to have a positive sense of self. The concept of place attachment has been applied empirically by Rubenstein and Parmelee (1992) and Sugihara and Evans (2000) who make the link between older people’s attachment to their private homes, maintaining a positive self-image, and supporting their independence. Thus, understanding place attachment has become a crucial subconcept for understanding wellbeing and positive self-image for older people. However, the existing body of research has focused largely on adults who are aging in stable and familiar living environments, mainly their private homes. As yet, little is known about experiences of place attachment among older homeless adults, a population that is rising in number but remains largely neglected in research, policy, and practice (Burns et al., 2012). Examples of place attachment in this section are based on a research study comparing the experiences of long-term, chronically homeless older adults who had moved in and out of homelessness over the course of their lives and NHOAs, adults who were experiencing their first episode of homelessness at age 50 and over and were homeless for a maximum of 2 years at the time of the study (Burns, 2015). In describing the chronically homeless shelter residents, service providers used the words “comfort” and “security” in relation to shelter living and specified that chronically homeless residents said they “hoped it was their last home”: 376 B. AKESSON ET AL. Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 15:43 03 January 2018 There is just a handful, maybe five or six. I’d say the ones who are truly aging here, they are hoping it is their last home . . . they have their own rituals, their space. Like, Mr. S. goes downstairs to the third floor where there is an English TV room to watch The Price Is Right, and that is a major part of his day. The whole TV room knows that it is Mr. S’s The Price Is Right. If he is not there at 11, they still switch the channel in anticipation. It is just established. The long-term homeless adults had established a sense of social and physical and autobiographical insideness within the shelter. Having lived at the shelter for years, they had established routines and knew their physical environment well (known as autobiographical and physical insideness). They were connected to their community, and, in turn, they were well known by others (i.e., they had high levels of social insideness), all of which are signs of heightened place attachment (Rowles, 1978). In contrast, the NHOAs battled place attachment at the shelter by actively working toward exiting homelessness as quickly as possible. They spent as little time as possible at the shelter, avoided shelter residents, and refused to self-identify as homeless. One NHOA explained that he was doing everything to avoid “becoming part of the furniture” as he has seen happen with other shelter residents, Some people they live here for years. They are part of the furniture that’s why, I see that too much, and I don’t want to. [The homeless shelter] is only a trampoline. That’s what I’m putting in my head and saying, oh, it’s a bouncing place. I bounce. By considering the subconcept of place attachment from the narratives of older homeless adults, this study provides important insight into how the experience of place attachment can differ for people who are residing in an emergency homeless shelter. The long-term homeless wished to age in place inside an emergency shelter. This desire to stay put was reinforced by feelings of physical, autobiographical, and social insideness (Rowles, 1978). On the other hand, the NHOAs aimed to avoid becoming attached to the shelter or establishing any form of insideness. They convinced themselves that homelessness was only temporary, which in turn was also a strategy to resist taking on a negative homeless identity. Overall, the results of this study show that within the growing population of older homeless adults, those who become homeless for the first time in later life have different experiences with place attachment than those who have been homeless for extended periods of time. Acknowledging older homeless adults’ differing experiences with place attachment is a promising strategy to guide rehousing strategies and ensure the diversity of needs are met. The concept of place and its related subconcept of place attachment are certainly pertinent theoretical lenses to view the experiences of individuals who have experienced homelessness. Likewise, as the next section demonstrates, connection with place through nature can help immigrant families adapt to their new social and physical environments by contributing to the development of place identity. Nature and urban place identity for immigrant families Within urban settings, several dimensions have been found to be pertinent in the development of individual and collective place identities, which include (a) continuity between the present location and one’s personal past, (b) feelings of belongingness and rootedness, (c) the ability to perceive what is unique about the urban place, (d) a sense of familiarity and orientation, and (e) a commitment to stay (Lalli, 1992). Researchers have found that nature spaces such as parks and gardens play a role in the development of place identity in immigrant adult populations (Li, Hodgetts, & Ho, 2010; Morgan, Rocha, & Poynting, 2005; Rishbeth, 2004; Rishbeth & Finney, 2006). It has remained unclear, however, whether the natural environment as experienced in urban centers influences the development of place identity in immigrant families. This section draws on findings from a research study exploring how encounters with the urban natural environment, flora, fauna, geography, and climate influenced the adaptation of newcomer JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION 377 Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 15:43 03 January 2018 children and their families (Hordyk, Dulude, & Shem, 2015; Hordyk, Hanley, & Richard, 2015). Using the social determinants of a health framework, psychological, social, and physical factors emerged. As illustrated in the following, urban nature spaces in home and public settings contributed to a new place identity. Sensory nature experiences facilitated a deepened awareness of the present physical environment while stimulating memories of the home country. This movement between past and present allowed newcomers to develop a hybrid sense of place identity in which the past and present were woven together. Immigrant families who accessed urban parks and gardens described their outdoor experiences as providing a sense of continuity between the home and the host country. More than visual, a wide variety of sensory-filled experiences—described by participants as the varied aroma of herbs, the incessant buzzing of the cicadas, the mouth-watering taste of fresh tomatoes, the touch of earth, the sight of tiny shoots pushing through the ground—were instrumental. Juanita was conscious of this need for familiarity, stating that one of the reasons she chose to immigrate to Canada was the similarity between Canada and her home country in South America: When I came here, I wanted a change in my life. I really like nature in [her home country], but I could not choose an area that was too different . . . I like the ocean. I like the sun. I like nature and green vegetation. I wanted to go somewhere where I could have that. Juanita chose to come to Canada in May so that she could adjust to this new country in the spring and summer, the seasons that most closely represented what she had known in her home country. Urban natural settings also contributed to a collective sense of identity when outdoor family traditions could be revived in a new city. Lien and Vong had already established a family tradition in their home country, regularly frequenting a large urban park on the weekends. This tradition had increased in frequency now that they lived within walking distance of a neighborhood park in Montreal, which allowed them to feel more at home with other Montreal families. Lien also described how the urban park contributed to individual identity when she described how her children “are more relaxed.” Having room to run and play outdoors on a daily basis had made her children less pressured and performanceoriented than before. Newcomer families created a sense of continuity between the home and host countries through traditions of gardening on balconies, windowsills, and in yards. Some plants were recognizable to them, whereas others were clearly unique to their home country, as the seeds had been imported. Indoors, some grew small tropical plants from the seeds of oranges, avocadoes, or lemons, and they kept these throughout the winter. Although they knew the plants would not readily bear fruit in Montreal’s cold climate, the plants were reminiscent of home and provided a bridge between where families once had been and where they now found themselves, once again facilitating a new sense of identity. That nature places in urban settings contributed to feelings of belonging and rootedness. While meeting with Dora and her mother in a local park, the third author (Hordyk) was invited by Dora to a place that she called her “hiding spot.” Located in the corner of the park, a group of low-lying trees had branches that were accessible for her to climb. As it was summer, the branches were filled with leaves, providing privacy from those who passed by. Her mother stated that each time they came to the park, Dora wanted to spend time there. When asked about the first thing she heard when she arrived in Canada, she replied that she heard the trees greeting her and whispering “coo-coo Dora.” Her mother explained that she and Dora lived in an apartment that had little privacy because of its size and paper-thin walls. The neighbors complained when they heard Dora playing or running in the apartment. Dora felt a sense of belonging perched in the trees of this hiding place. Feelings of belonging were also fostered by environmental conservation traditions that some families began on their arrival in Canada. Selena had lived in countries where recycling programs were not an established community-based practice. In Montreal where recycling was discussed in community centers and schools as well as modeled by her neighbors, Selena shared how her identification as Canadian was shaped in part by her participation in this local environmental practice. Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 15:43 03 January 2018 378 B. AKESSON ET AL. As social work educators preparing students to engage with immigrant populations in the process of adapting to a new social and physical environment, we might consider the embodied experiences in urban nature settings that children and families draw on to develop their identities. As newcomers negotiate the process of adaptation to new geographies, traditions, and communities (Ensor & Gozìdziak, 2010; Lansford, Deater-Deckard, & Bornstein, 2007), social workers might consider how sensory contact with nature components of the environment, in parks, on sidewalks, on windowsills, or seen through windows, facilitate an embodied awareness of place and a transformed awareness of self within that place. Contact with urban nature provides continuity between the home and host countries, permits newcomers to become aware of and participate in local ecological initiatives, and facilitates the strengthening of individual and collective identities that are simultaneously rooted in the home country and the place of migration. This section clearly illustrates the importance of place, specifically urban nature, for the development of identity among immigrant populations. Using examples from research with war-affected populations, the next section explores how politics and power intersect with place (including place attachment and place identity) and contribute to territoriality. The politics and power of territoriality for war-affected children and families The concept of territoriality is particularly apt in explaining the politics and power of place for waraffected children and families, for the places that these populations live in are highly politicized. Territoriality’s very definition implies that it is embedded in relations of power as a strategy for establishing different access to and movement within place. Based on a study exploring the concept and meaning of place for Palestinian children and families living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem (Akesson, 2014b, 2015, 2016), this section provides examples that show that the politics and power of place are openly on display in their everyday experiences. Territories are clearly defined and embedded in power and politics and have direct implications on the everyday experiences of their residents. The 709-kilometer separation wall between Israel and the West Bank is one of the most extreme exercises in territoriality, slicing deep into the Palestinian territories (Falah, 2003; Fields, 2010; Halper, 2000; Parsons & Salter, 2008). With the construction of the wall, the West Bank has been territorially segmented, with certain areas designated for either Palestinian or Israeli access (Falah, 2003; Hanafi, 2009; Newman, 1996). Tawil-Souri (2011) describes this kind of territoriality as a demonstration of “how directly and explicitly domination and control are inscribed into the way space is organized” (p. 13). The wall currently isolates at least 35,000 Palestinians and 50 communities in the areas between the wall and the Green Line, which is the internationally recognized border between Israel and the West Bank. Adil, a young Palestinian man from the West Bank, described in the following how the wall divides his community: They want to surround [my village] by the wall. . . . So the wall is just going [to be] at the middle of the village. So, I live here and my brother lives here and none of us can see the other. Similarly, a family from a small village in the West Bank described the effects of the wall on their lives: Aunt: We cannot go places, because the wall stops our mobility. Grandfather: They have confiscated our lands to build the wall. Aunt: We cannot move freely. . . . We cannot go to Jerusalem. They don’t give us permission. The children have relatives who live on the other side of the wall. They cannot move freely to see them. As this exchange indicates, the construction of the wall has led to substantial economic losses for Palestinian families, including loss of land, destruction of key environmental assets, and restricted access of farmers to their land (Save the Children Sweden, International Bureau for Children’s Rights, & Defence for Children International, 2011). Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 15:43 03 January 2018 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION 379 Another example of a highly contested territory is the military checkpoint, which mediates Palestinian mobility. Movement in Palestine is highly controlled through military checkpoints, and travel between Israel and the West Bank is almost completely banned; it is only allowed for restricted categories of people such as medical personnel or employees of diplomatic or international institutions, all of whom are required to obtain special permission from Israeli authorities (Abu Nahleh, 2006). Yet, even those granted permission may or may not be able to pass because of the prevailing political climate. Sanaa, a young Palestinian woman from East Jerusalem, explained, “Here we spend every day, three hour, five hour in the checkpoint to go into Jerusalem, and it’s just [a] ten minutes [walk].” Likewise, a mother of seven from a small village in the West Bank said, “it affects our life . . ., we hardly move. Always, we’re forced to stay home. We can’t go whenever we want.” Because of its ambiguous and contested nature, the military checkpoint is a flashpoint for resistance against Israeli occupation, representing a territorial struggle that involves children and families. Policies such as checkpoints and the wall contribute to what Halper (2000) has termed Israel’s matrix of control, which uses territoriality to create artificial borders, limit movement within and across borders, and effectively suppress everyday activities of the Palestinian people. Because of these movement restrictions, Palestinian children and families experience difficulty accessing education, employment, and medical care (Giacaman et al., 2009), as well as visiting family members who may live in another area of the West Bank or East Jerusalem. Sanaa explained how she must travel a long distance to get to and from her university, even though she only lives 10 minutes away: “Every day I make a big circle to come here, because [of] the checkpoint, because [of] the wall. And they say, why is it [a] bad life? I know!” Restricted mobility obviously has specific consequences for children and their families living in contexts such as Palestine; when family members are suddenly separated from one another by physical barriers, the family unit is undermined, and children’s protective social environment and overall well-being are compromised. As social workers continue to work with war-affected populations at home and abroad they must consider the distinct intersection between children’s and families’ engagement with places, the impact of this engagement on their understandings of place, and the political uses of space, exemplified by the subconcept of territoriality. This intersection resonates with the human and political geography literature, which has delved into the strong reciprocal entanglements among people, place, and power (Pile & Keith, 1997; Sharp, Routledge, Philo, & Paddison, 2000). Findings from this particular research project revealed that the nature of children’s and families’ interactions and discourses with place conveyed a deep understanding of place. By integrating an understanding of territoriality, social work is well-placed to better integrate solutions to improve the place-related well-being of war-affected populations. Discussion and conclusion: Conceptualizing the place of place in social work education This article demonstrates that the geographical concept of place provides a nuanced lens for considering the critical importance of the physical environment in daily human functioning. Findings from research with older homeless adults, newcomer families, and war-affected children and families provide evidence of how the physical environments of individuals and families hold deep personal meaning. These populations have complex and contradictory relationships with their environments. As social work attempts to address today’s pressing and complex social issues, the concept of place offers a fresh perspective to better understand what helps and hinders well-being, comfort, and security among the marginalized populations with which social workers interact. Theories of place attachment, place identity, and territoriality indicate that changes in these environments may have an impact on social, emotional, and physical functioning in a manner that is equal to if not greater than changes in one’s social environment. Social workers engaged in community and clinical practice can access concepts of place to deepen our understanding of the diverse meanings and experiences different populations may have with Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 15:43 03 January 2018 380 B. AKESSON ET AL. certain geographical locations. For example, conventional homes for older homeless people are not always the ideal place for long-term homeless who have become attached to shelter life and consider the shelter a home. Yet, recently homeless older adults resist forming attachment to shelters by actively seeking housing and work with aims to exit homelessness as quickly as possible. Similarly, for populations affected by war, home is not always a safe and protective environment (Akesson, 2014a). The home, despite potentially offering physical protection from violence in the surrounding community can also be a site of neglect or family violence, an understanding of place that might not be easily apparent to a social worker. Likewise, feeling a sense of belonging as an immigrant in a new neighborhood or country depends on an ability to tolerate unfamiliar and at times threatening sensory experiences while simultaneously recognizing sensory stimuli that have some commonality with the past. This embodied sense of knowing is critical to locating oneself within a new environment. Over time a new hybrid place identity is fostered between home and host countries. When we as social workers are so familiar with geography that we no longer have to reflect on how to locate ourselves, we can forget the complex placed-based decisions needed to navigate daily life. Questioning our own assumptions of place positions us to ask more nuanced questions of our clients and to recognize potential barriers or resources that place provides to health and well-being. To illustrate, we suggest incorporating questions such as those listed in Table 1 into assessment models used in social work education. We suggest that these questions may stimulate thoughts in the populations we work with, allowing them also to become conscious of place-based strategies that can also be implemented to promote health and well-being. These questions are intended to complement existing assessments used in social work practice and to widen the dialogue concerning the ecological models used in social work education and intervention. In the context of social work practice and education, these questions can be used to underscore the connection people have with place. As world populations are shifting at an increasingly rapid pace, whether moving to urban centers or across borders, people’s relationship with place is constantly in transition. This conceptual article demonstrates how place—and specifically place attachment, place identity, and territoriality—can enhance social work education and shape and improve our understanding and interventions with diverse populations, such as those who are marginalized. Ultimately, the concept of place provides a fresh avenue of inquiry to advance our knowledge in social work education and practice. Incorporating the concept of place into social work education will introduce broader definitions of the environment, which in turn will lead to more holistic, client-centered interventions in social work practice. Table 1. Place-based questions for social work assessment. ● What adjectives would you use to describe the physical aspects of your current living environment, what you call home, and the environment that you move through or work in each day? ● What is the first thing that comes to your mind when you think of the aroma, sound, visual, tactile, and taste aspects of this particular place (whichever may apply)? ● How does this environment make you feel? ● Which aspects of this environment contribute to a sense of feeling well? Which aspects would you describe as contributing to stress? ● If you could change anything about this environment, what would it be? How did you arrive at this place (e.g., born here, immigrated here, forced to relocate)? What were your hopes and expectations when you arrived at this place? Do you feel that you have enough places here where you feel comfortable and feel as if you belong here? Please explain. Does this place make you feel safe? Please explain. Do aspects of this place contribute to feelings of belonging in you and your family? What makes it difficult for you and your family to feel like you belong to this place? ● What activities remind you and your family of different places? Do you and your family have adequate access to these activities? ● Does this place contribute to your understanding of self, family, or community? Why or why not? ● ● ● ● JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION 381 Notes on contributors Bree Akesson is an Assistant Professor at Wilfrid Laurier University's Lyle S. Hallman Faculty of Social Work in Ontario, Canada. Victoria Burns is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique (INRS)–Urbanisation, Culture et Société (UCS) in Quebec, Canada. Shawn-Renee Hordyk is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at École de Psychoéducation, Université de Montréal in Quebec, Canada. ORCID Bree Akesson http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6760-7198 Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 15:43 03 January 2018 References Abu Nahleh, L. (2006). Six families: Survival and mobility in times of crisis. In L. Taraki (Ed.), Living Palestine: Family survival, resistance and mobility under occupation (pp. 103–184). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press. Akesson, B. (2014a). Castle and cage: Meanings of home for Palestinian children and families. Global Social Welfare, 1, 81–95. doi:10.1007/s40609-014-0004-y Akesson, B. (2014b). Contradictions in place: Everyday geographies of Palestinian children and families living under occupation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada. Akesson, B. (2015). Trees, flowers, prisons, flags: Frustration and hope shaping national identity for Palestinian families. Global Studies of Childhood, 5, 33–46. doi:10.1177/2043610615573378 Akesson, B. (2016). Palestinian children forging national identity through the social and spatial practices of territoriality. In Z. Millei, & R. Imre (Eds.), Ideals of childhood and nation in the twenty-first century: International case studies and perspectives (pp. 141-162). Basingstoke, UK: Plagrave Macmillan. Altman, I., & Low, S. M. (1992). Place attachment. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Burns, V. (2015). Oscillating in and out of place across housed-homeless trajectories: Experiences of newly homeless older adults in Montreal. Montréal, Canada: McGill University. Burns, V., Grenier, A., Lavoie, J.-P., Rothwell, D., & Sussman, T. (2012). Les personnes âgées itinérantes—Invisibles et exclues. Une analyse de trois stratégies pour contrer l’itinérance. Frontières, 25, 31–56. doi:10.7202/1018230ar Coates, J. (2003). Ecology and social work: Towards a new paradigm. Halifax, Canada: Fernwood. Cornell, K. L. (2006). Person-in-situation: History, theory, and new directions for social work practice. Praxis, 6, 50– 57. Cresswell, T. (1996). In place/out of place: Geography, ideology and transgression. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Cresswell, T. (2004). Place: A short introduction. London, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Dixon, J. A., & Durrheim, K. (2000). Displacing place-identity: A discursive approach to locating self and other. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 27–44. doi:10.1348/014466600164318 Ensor, M. O., & Gozìdziak, E. M. (2010). Children and migration: At the crossroads of resiliency and vulnerability. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Falah, G.-W. (2003). Dynamics and patterns of the shrinking of Arab lands in Palestine. Political Geography, 22, 179– 209. doi:10.1016/S0962-6298(02)00088-4 Fields, G. (2010). Landscaping Palestine: Reflections of enclosure in a historical mirror. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 42, 82a. doi:10.1017/S0020743809990821 Fullilove, M. (2014). “The frayed knot”: What happens to place attachment in the context of serial forced displacement? In L. C. Manzo, & P. Devine-Wright (Eds.), Place attachment: Advances in theory, methods and applications (pp. 141–153). Abingdon, UK: Routledge. Germain, C. (1973). An ecological perspective in casework practice. Social Casework, 54, 323–330. Giacaman, R., Khatib, R., Shabaneh, L., Ramlawi, A., Sabri, B., Sabatinelli, G., . . . Laurance, T. (2009). Health status and health services in the occupied Palestinian territory. The Lancet, 373, 837–849. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09) 60107-0 Goldstein, E. (2009). The relationship between social work and psychoanalysis: The future impact of social workers. Clinical Social Work Journal, 37, 7–13. doi:10.1007/s10615-007-0090-8 Guest, A. M., & Wierzbicki, S. K. (1999). Social ties at the neighborhood level: Two decades of GSS evidence. Urban Affairs Review, 35, 92–111. doi:10.1177/10780879922184301 Halper, J. (2000). The 94 percent solution: A matrix of control. Middle East Report, 216, 14–19. doi:10.2307/1520209 Hanafi, S. (2009). Spacio-cide: Colonial politics, invisibility and rezoning in Palestinian territory. Contemporary Arab Affairs, 2, 106–121. doi:10.1080/17550910802622645 Harvey, D. (1973). Social justice and the city. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press. Harvey, D. (1996). Justice, nature and the geography of difference. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 15:43 03 January 2018 382 B. AKESSON ET AL. Hordyk, S. R. (2014). “Nature is always there”: The role of nature in the adaptation process of immigrant children. Montréal, Canada: McGill University. Hordyk, S. R., Dulude, M., & Shem, M. (2015). When nature nurtures children: Nature as a containing and holding space. Children’s Geographies, 13, 571–588. doi:10.1080/14733285.2014.923814 Hordyk, S. R., Hanley, J., & Richard, É. (2015). “Nature is there; its free”: Urban greenspace and the social determinants of health of immigrant families. Health & Place, 34, 74–82. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.03.016 Ittelson, W., Proshansky, H. M., Rivlin, L. G., Winkel, G. H., & Dempsey, D. (1974). An introduction to environmental psychology. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Janchill, M. P. (1969). Systems concepts in casework theory and practice. Social Casework, 50(2), 74–82. Lalli, M. (1992). Urban-related identity: Theory, measurement, and empirical findings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12, 285–303. doi:10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80078-7 Lang, J. (1987). Creating architectural theory: The role of the behavioral sciences in environmental design. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold Lansford, J. E., Deater-...
Purchase answer to see full attachment