download - Deutsches Jugendinstitut e.V.

Uniform EU standards for social work in urban areas?
If one considers the present social and regional political developments in the new EU
member states, it can on the one hand be established that great differences exist,
particularly on a socio-political level, which have developed from different historical roots
and therefore also on different paradigms. In Germany for example, a “dual” system of
welfare originated for the poor shared by church and state (General Prussian Land Act of
1794), initially as a separate system (welfare/control/responsibility) and later as a
corresponding system (“Elberfelder System”) in which local authorities and the federal
states were responsible. In Great Britain/USA, the German system was adopted, but minus
the voluntary character; the Poor Law (1834) replaced the alms system from the time of
Elizabeth I; the “worthy poor” were the responsibility of private welfare, whereas the
“unworthy poor” were taken care of by state welfare. The local authorities are subordinate
to central government and church and private associations are independent from one
another. In Sweden, the transformation from a feudalistic agricultural to an industrial society
took place during a relatively late period in comparison to other European countries and
became cemented in a type of double structure containing both welfare principles from
agricultural rural families and the paradigms of state social welfare. Here there is no
separation of state and society/church, as the welfare associations are merged into the
state. In the Netherlands, the priority of the population over the state resulted out of the
“struggles for freedom” and a notably social orientation of church organisations,
particularly in provisions for elder citizens.
On the basis of these developments, a wide range of socio-political operational systems
and a variety of administrative operational levels currently exist. This produces on the one
hand a highly variable handling of social phenomena.
On the other hand, comparable social-political phenomena also exist. There are for
example common economic and social-structural developments, comparable child and
youth socialising trends and also similar modernisation phenomena.
These social-structural common denominators coupled with socio-political differences
suggest on the one hand differentiated strategies. These should however be oriented
towards common criteria which in turn could assume a benchmarking character for a
European political strategy within this field.
The following criteria appear to me to be relevant across the board for all countries,
although the design of content and methods could also possess a country-specific
character:
• Participation principle: both ethical aspects and the necessity for sustainability
require the existence of this principle
• Socio-environmental orientation: this targets the relevant geographical,
material, cultural and social foundations in each country and places them at the
core of further action.
• Efficiency and/or ecological orientation: this criterion represents a
compatible treatment of resources and a comprehensive ascertainment of the
area targeted.
• Relativity principle: the prerogative of interpretation and the weighting of
problems are assigned to the countries and/or regions
97