Search

Traditional culture in post-colonial Solomon Islands is experiencing neoliberal impositions of market forces and individualistic social work programmes based upon global welfare rights. Previous research has emphasised culturally derived national resilience and the economic benefits of ‘Kastom’. Emergent research questions are (a) whether Indigenous social work could avoid absolute (colonial) impositions or negligent cultural relativism by using relationship-based ethical approaches that emphasise cultural strengths, and (b) whether this development might benefit Pacific social welfare models. Qualitative interviews with local child protection workers indicate that traditional values assist legislative intervention and that significant potential exists in better integration of Indigenous approaches into practice.

Social work developed from Christian caring and a eudaimonic desire for a worthwhile life. Although ethics continue to underpin the discipline, contemporary complexities of post-modernism, globalism and managerialism are destabilising the universalist moral intentions of practice and subsequently demotivating eudaimonic drives. Cultural and context-specific relativist influences are promoting an ethics of ‘fitting in’ which, without critical analysis, betrays client best interests by favouring formulaic absolutes. Alternative, relationist theory can support a critically reflective and care-ethics-driven practice that is motivating, clearer and focused on ontological consideration of dynamic client, practitioner and environmental needs. It can thus help social workers to situate themselves and achieve personal and professional transformation.

Despite a burgeoning literature, the role of bohemians in the urban milieu and in initiatives toward regeneration remains contested. As a first step toward later modeling and application, we present a thoroughgoing literature review, a short commentary on bohemian phenomena, and suggested readings. Since qualitative sources dominate the field, the review is structured rather than fully systematic in the scientific sense. After discarding innumerable irrelevant and incidental papers, three strands remained for subsequent analysis: “bohemian,” “bohemian + creative-city,” and “smart regeneration.” The first is static or historically contextualized, situated best in the humanities. The last two strands are dynamic and dissect, descriptively or analytically, elements of bohemianism relevant to the urban scene. Wherever and whenever they emerge, radical bohemian artists test existing limits or incite transformative action.