The Sage Handbook of Social Constructionist Practice. Группа авторов
a Relational View: Dialogue, reflexivity, power and ethics (pp. 17–33). London: Routledge.
McNamee, S. and Gergen, K. J. (eds.) (1999). Relational Responsibility. London: Sage.
McNamee, S. and Hosking, D. M. (2012). Research and Social Change: A relational constructionist approach. London: Routledge.
Ness, O. (2011). Learning new ideas and practices together: A co-operative inquiry into learning to use Johnella Bird's relational language-making approach in couples therapy. PhD-dissertation Tilburg University. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.
Ness, O. (2020). Learning New Ideas and Practices together through Relational Action Research. In L. Hersted, S. Frimann, and O. Ness (Eds.), Action Research in a Relational View: Dialogue, reflexivity, power and ethics (pp. 93–110). London: Routledge.
Ness, O., Borg, M., Semb, R., and Karlsson. B., (2014). ‘Walking alongside’: Collaborative practices in mental health and substance use care. International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 8:55.
New Zealand Government. (2019). Seeking Views and Ideas. Retrieved August 6, 2019 from https://dpmc.govt.nz/our-programmes/child-and-youth-wellbeing-strategy/seeking-views-and-ideas
Ngā Tūtohu Aotearoa – Indicators Aotearoa New Zealand (2019). Wellbeing Data for New Zealanders. Retrieved August, 6, 2019 from https://wellbeingindicators.stats.govt.nz/?_ga=2.244606725.1222980137.1565120255-924832265.1563521560
Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and Human Development: The capabilities approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the Great Divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development. World Development, 24(6), 1073–1087.
Pestoff, V. (2019). Co-production and Public Service Management: Citizenship, governance and public management. London: Routledge.
Phillips, L. and Napan, K. (2016). What's in the ‘co'? Tending the tensions in co-creative inquiry in social work education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 29(6), 827–844.
Reason, P. (1999). Integrating Action and Reflection Through Cooperative Inquiry. Management Learning, 30(2), 207–227.
Reason, P., and Bradbury, H. (Eds.) (2001). Handbook of Action Research. London: Sage.
Reich, R. (2018). The Common Good. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Robeyns, I. (2005). The Capability Approach: A theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development, 6(1), 93–117.
Selloni, D. (2017). Co-design for Public Interest Services. Milano: Springer.
Sen, A. (1992). Inequality Re-examined. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. New York: Anchor Books.
Shotter, J. (1993). Conversational Realities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Shotter, J. (2008). Conversational Realities Revisited. Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos Institute Publications.
Smith, G. (2009). Democratic Innovations: Designing institutions for citizen participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Strong, T., Sutherland, O., and Ness, O. (2011). Considerations for a Discourse of Collaboration in Counseling. Asia Pacific Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy, 2(1), 25–40.
Sundet, R. (2011). Collaboration: Family and therapist perspectives of helpful therapy. Journal of Marital Family Therapy, 37(2), 236–249.
Swim, S., St. George, S. A., and Wulff, D. P. (2001). Process Ethics: A collaborative partnership. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 20(4), 14–24.
Torfing, J., Sørensen, E., and Røiseland, A. (2016). Transforming the Public Sector INTO an Arena for Co-Creation: Barriers, drivers, benefits and ways forward. Administration & Society, 51(5), 1–31.
Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., and Tummers, L. G. (2015). A Systematic Review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333–1357.
WEGo (nd). The Network of Wellbeing Economy Governments (WEGo). Retrieved August 6, 2019 from http://wellbeingeconomygovs.org/
Weinberg, D. (2008). The Philosophical Foundations of Constructionist Research. In J. A. Holstein and J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of Constructionist Research (pp. 13–39). London: Guilford Press.
World Health Organization (2013). Health 2020: A European Policy Framework and Strategy for the 21st Century. Geneva: World Health Organization.
World Health Organization (2019). Healthy, Prosperous Lives for All: The European Health Equity Status Report. Copenhagen: World Health Organization.
5 Action Research and Social Constructionism: Transformative Inquiry and Practice in Community
Hilary Bradbury
As the windows of the Academy open up, more scholars are called to co-create new experiments in societal learning in response to the social-ecological challenges we faced. Social constructionism is central in how action researchers work. Action Research is shaped by pragmatism, reflexivity and dialogue, in combination necessary to the action research transformative approach to learning-by-doing. This chapter proceeds with an introduction to Action-oriented Research for Transformations, or ART (Bradbury et al., 2019), and offers illustrations and principles for its contemporary practice. The author argues that constructionism offers a possibility for co-creating life sustaining institutions through our joint efforts.
Action research brings together action and reflection, theory and practice, with stakeholders, to issues of pressing concern; it is scholarly practice with a participative orientation to knowledge creation (Bradbury, 2015; Reason and Bradbury, 2000).
Action researchers seek to make a useful difference in a world in which scientific reports rarely provoke the response appropriate to the scale of the problems defined. Yet action researchers do not bring pre-packaged solutions. We acknowledge that expertise resides in the hands of stakeholders. Action researchers, do however, bring diagnostic and facilitative tools, along with distillation and documentation of notable results so that those involved can articulate their own answers and share them.
Action research belongs in a category of knowledge that has evolved from an orientation we might broadly label Pragmatism, which emphasizes the multi-dimensionality of human experience and knowledge. The central emphasis of Pragmatism is that knowledge should be assessed by its practical consequences and not - as Cartesian science insists - only by its explanatory power. As a brief framing, with more on the interweaving of heritage from Global South and North below, we may say that action researchers see clear intellectual lineage back to John Dewey's (1938) emphasis on the individual's active inquiry process in combination with William James’ articulation of the primacy of praxis in interaction with the world. This interweaving of learning and democracy also has roots in the work of Mary Parker Follett (1924) and Paolo Freire (1970). Knowledge-in-action concerns power; democracy is something to be learned as ever deeper levels of emancipation are realized.
Social constructionism (Berger and Luckmann, 1966), followed by the cognitive/linguistic turn, call us to appreciate the ways in which our individual (psychological) understandings of a situation actively shape our collective (sociological) reactions. Action researcher Budd Hall (1992), drawing on Berger and Luckmann (1966), explains that action researchers recognize that knowledge is socially constructed and embedded. This happens because action researchers are influenced by the potential of people they work with, their co-researchers, to shape their own world, through creative acts. Action research allows stakeholders not just to react, but to be choiceful about the type of world we want to shape. Marja-Liisa Swantz, a Finnish action researcher, credited