The Ecosocial Transition Of Societies The Contribution Of Social Work And Social Policy 1st Edition Ailaleena Matthies

The Ecosocial Transition Of Societies The Contribution Of Social Work And Social Policy 1st Edition Ailaleena Matthies
The Ecosocial Transition Of Societies The Contribution Of Social Work And Social Policy 1st Edition Ailaleena Matthies
The Ecosocial Transition Of Societies The Contribution Of Social Work And Social Policy 1st Edition Ailaleena Matthies

1. The Ecosocial Transition Of Societies The
Contribution Of Social Work And Social Policy
1st Edition Ailaleena Matthies download
https://ebookbell.com/product/the-ecosocial-transition-of-
societies-the-contribution-of-social-work-and-social-policy-1st-
edition-ailaleena-matthies-48313640
Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

2. Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.
The Geopolitics Of Green Colonialism Global Justice And Ecosocial
Transitions 1st Edition Miriam Lang
https://ebookbell.com/product/the-geopolitics-of-green-colonialism-
global-justice-and-ecosocial-transitions-1st-edition-miriam-
lang-56829700
Ecosocial Theory Embodied Truths And The Peoples Health Nancy Krieger
https://ebookbell.com/product/ecosocial-theory-embodied-truths-and-
the-peoples-health-nancy-krieger-42448876
Towards An Integrated Paradigm In Heterodox Economics Alternative
Approaches To The Current Ecosocial Crises Julienfranois Gerber
https://ebookbell.com/product/towards-an-integrated-paradigm-in-
heterodox-economics-alternative-approaches-to-the-current-ecosocial-
crises-julienfranois-gerber-5364672
Between The Sea And The Lagoon An Ecosocial History Of The Anlo Of
Southeastern Ghana C 1850 To Recent Times Emmanuel Kwaku Akyeampong
https://ebookbell.com/product/between-the-sea-and-the-lagoon-an-
ecosocial-history-of-the-anlo-of-southeastern-ghana-c-1850-to-recent-
times-emmanuel-kwaku-akyeampong-22536850

3. Ecology Soils And The Left An Ecosocial Approach Salvatore Engeldi
Mauro Auth
https://ebookbell.com/product/ecology-soils-and-the-left-an-ecosocial-
approach-salvatore-engeldi-mauro-auth-5378064
The Union Haggadah Home Service For The Passover Central Conference Of
American Rabbis Rabbis
https://ebookbell.com/product/the-union-haggadah-home-service-for-the-
passover-central-conference-of-american-rabbis-rabbis-33546358
The Roman Republic Of Letters Scholarship Philosophy And Politics In
The Age Of Cicero And Caesar Catherine Volk
https://ebookbell.com/product/the-roman-republic-of-letters-
scholarship-philosophy-and-politics-in-the-age-of-cicero-and-caesar-
catherine-volk-44860132
The Ninth Month James Patterson
https://ebookbell.com/product/the-ninth-month-james-patterson-44862442
The History Written On The Classical Greek Body Robin Osborne
https://ebookbell.com/product/the-history-written-on-the-classical-
greek-body-robin-osborne-44863234

6. ‘This book addresses the most important issues for social work as a profession
in transition during a time of vast environmental challenges. Chapters
range from policy and conceptualisation through to practice that focuses on
sustainability, activism and food politics. This is the new face of social work,
and it’s wonderful to see a contribution that incorporates contributions from
so many parts of the globe.’
Jennifer McKinnon, Adjunct Professor,
Charles Sturt University, Australia

8. The Ecosocial Transition of
Societies
This groundbreaking book both explains and expands the growing debate on
ecological (environmental) social work at the global level. In order to achieve
this, the book strengthens the environmental paradigm in social work and social
policy by undertaking further research on theoretical and conceptual clarification
as well as distinct reflections on its practical directions.
Divided into five parts – concepts; the impact of environmental crises;
sustainable communities and lifestyles; food politics; and the profession in
transition – this work’s main objective is to place ecological social work as a part
of the more comprehensive and interdisciplinary ecosocial transition of societies
towards sustainability, balancing economic and social development with the
limited resources of the natural environment. By focussing on these five core
concepts, it shows how social work and social policy contribute to this transition
through having a research-based approach and orientation on solutions rather than
problem analysis.
The book will be of interest to scholars from a broad range of disciplines,
including those in social work and social policy, sustainability, economics,
agriculture and environmental studies.
Aila-Leena Matthies is Professor of Social Work at the University of Jyväskylä,
Kokkola University Consortium. She has been publishing about the ecosocial
perspective of social work in Finnish, German and English since the late 1980s.
Kati Närhi is Professor of Social Work in the Department of Social Sciences
and Philosophy, University of Jyväskylä, Finland. Her main research interests are
ecosocial approach in social work, ecosocial transition, community social work,
structural social work, participation and user involvement.

9. Routledge Advances in Social Work
New titles:
Analysing Social Work Communication
Discourse in Practice
Edited by Christopher Hall, Kirsi Juhila, Maureen Matarese and Carolus van Nijnatten
Feminisms in Social Work Research
Promise and Possibilities for Justice-based Knowledge
Edited by Stéphanie Wahab, Ben Anderson-Nathe and Christina Gringeri
Chronic Illness, Vulnerability and Social Work
Autoimmunity and the Contemporary Disease Experience
Liz Walker and Elizabeth Price
Social Work in a Global Context
Issues and Challenges
Edited by George Palattiyil, Dina Sidhva and Mono Chakrabarti
Contemporary Feminisms in Social Work Practice
Edited by Nicole Moulding and Sarah Wendt
Domestic Violence Perpetrators
Evidence-Informed Responses
John Devaney and Anne Lazenbatt
Transnational Social Work and Social Welfare
Challenges for the Social Work Profession
Edited by Beatrix Schwarzer, Ursula Kämmerer-Rütten, Alexandra Schleyer-Lindemann
and Yafang Wang
The Ecosocial Transition of Societies
The contribution of social work and social policy
Edited by Aila-Leena Matthies and Kati Närhi
Forthcoming titles:
Responsibilization at the Margins of Welfare Services
Edited by Kirsi Juhila, Suvi Raitakari and Christopher Hall
Homelessness and Social Work
An Intersectional Approach
Carole Zufferey
Supporting Care Leavers’ Educational Transitions
Jennifer Driscoll

10. The Ecosocial Transition of
Societies
The contribution of social work and
social policy
Edited by Aila-Leena Matthies and
Kati Närhi

11. First published 2017
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2017 selection and editorial matter, Aila-Leena Matthies and Kati Närhi;
individual chapters, the contributors
The right of Aila-Leena Matthies and Kati Närhi to be identified as the
authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual
chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
A catalog record for this book has been requested
ISBN: 978-1-4724-7349-3 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-315-61591-2 (ebk)
Typeset in Times New Roman
by HWA Text and Data Management, London

12. Contents
List of figures x
List of tables xi
List of contributors xii
1 Introduction: It is the time for social work and social policy
research on the ecosocial transition 1
AILA-LEENA MATTHIES AND KATI NäRHI
PART I
Concepts 15
2 The conceptualization of ecosocial transition 17
AILA-LEENA MATTHIES
3 The relational conception of wellbeing as a catalyst for the
ecosocial transition 36
TUULA HELNE AND TUULI HIRvILAMMI
4 Community-based economy and ecosocial transition 54
SUSANNE ELSEN
5 Thinking about commons: A post-capitalist perspective for
social work 71
JEF PEETERS

13. viii Contents
PART II
Tackling challenges and complexities 89
6 Ecosocial work: Reflections from the global south 91
MARGARET ALSTON
7 Scopes for Adivasi-centred ecosocial work in an Indian
mining region? 105
SATU RANTA-TYRKKö AND BIPIN JOJO
8 Instrumentalism and environmental justice: People’s
cooperative renewable energy in Mauritius 121
KOMALSINGH RAMBAREE
PART III
Sustainable communities and lifestyles 137
9 An ecosocial model for the sustainability of vulnerable
communities 139
HELENA BELCHIOR ROCHA AND JORGE M. L. FERREIRA
10 Social work and eco-activism: From seed bombs to
community gardens, bike lanes to sustainable urbanism 158
BENJAMIN SHEPARD
11 Local welfare systems in rural Finland as a representation
of sustainable development 174
NIINA RANTAMäKI AND MARI KATTILAKOSKI
12 Ecosocial transitions: Exploring the wisdom of our elders 190
HEATHER BOETTO AND WENDY BOWLES
13 Promoting ecosocial transition through permaculture: A
practice tool for social work 206
JENNIFER BODDY AND SYLvIA RAMSAY

14. Contents ix
PART IV
Food politics 217
14 Charitable food aid in a Nordic welfare state: A case for
environmental and social injustice 219
TEEA KORTETMäKI AND TIINA SILvASTI
15 Farm to Table: Promoting nutritious and affordable food in
a state with varied cultural traditions and scarce water 234
DOROTHY N. GAMBLE
16 Food poverty between charity and the human right to food:
The case of urban gardens in Slovenia 251
vESNA LESKOšEK AND ROMANA ZIDAR
PART V
Profession in change 269
17 The role of social workers in a time of ecological crisis 271
SUBHANGI M. K. HERATH
18 Transforming the profession: Social workers’ expanding
response to the environmental crisis 286
MEREDITH C. F. POWERS
19 The changing understandings of the ‘person in environment’
in organizing public social work practice 301
KATI NäRHI
20 The contribution of social work and social policy in
ecosocial transition of society 319
KATI NäRHI AND AILA-LEENA MATTHIES
Index 327

15. Figures
2.1 Contribution of social work and social policy to ecosocial
transition 29
3.1 Cycle of disconnection 39
3.2 Cycle of connection 40
3.3 The relational view of wellbeing 43
5.1 The neo-liberal arrangement and the twofold privatization 72
5.2 Four scenarios for P2P-production 80
5.3 Scenario for a post-capitalist societal balance 85
9.1 Perception of social action influence degree 143
9.2 Approach indicators 151
9.3 Social work ecosocial model 155
12.1 Ripples of ecosocial transformation 202
16.1 Number of people living at-risk-of-poverty and people receiving
food from EC food supplies distributed by charity organizations,
trend 2006–2012 254
16.2 Food and non-alcoholic beverages, level of own production in
2012 (per cent) 259
18.1 Model of reciprocal professional socialization of social workers
for professional identity development that includes a response to
the environmental crisis 296
19.1 Social workers’ logic in developing a sustainable living
environment 306

16. Tables
2.1 Scenarios of ecosocial transition 20
5.1 Typology of social and economic relationships 74
5.2 Typology of goods following neoclassical economics 76
9.1 Discrimination measures 143
11.1 Socio-economic and demographic structure of the research
localities in comparison with Finland as a whole 180
11.2 The relevance of rural Local Welfare Systems from the
perspective of sustainability 185
15.1 Strategies of sustainable social, economic, and environmental
development 245
16.1 At-risk-of-poverty rate in European countries with a noticeable
increase in individual wealth (comparing 2007, 2013) 252
16.2 List of respondents 256
17.1 Occurrence of landslides in Sri Lanka 2000–2010 273

17. Contributors
Margaret Alston OAM is Head of Department of Social Work at Monash
University, Australia, where she has established the Gender, Leadership and Social
Sustainability (GLASS) research unit. Prior to commencing at Monash she was
Professor of Social Work and Human Services and Director of the Centre for Rural
Social Research at Charles Sturt University. She is a Foundation Fellow of the
Australian College of Social Workers and is the past Chair of the Australian Council
of Heads of Schools of Social Work. She has published widely in the field of rural
gender and rural social issues. She has acted as a gender expert for UN–Habitat in
Kenya, the Food and Agricultural Organization in Rome, UNESCO in the Pacific
and UNEP in Geneva. She received the Medal of the Order of Australia in 2010 for
services to social work and the advancement of women, particularly in rural areas.
Helena Belchior Rocha finished her PhD in Social Work on the environmental
sustainability of vulnerable communities in 2016. She is an assistant researcher
at the Centre for Research and Studies in Sociology (CIES-IUL) and she lectures
at LLCT/ISCTE-IUL University Institute of Lisbon. Her research addresses
the following fields: social development, sustainability, environment, ethics,
community work and social policies. Alongside her academic tasks she has been
involved in a national research project Urban Renewal of Quinta da Mina and
Sol City. She is author or co-author of numerous articles published in scientific
journals and in social work publications, and she is a member of the board
(secretariat) of the scientific journal Social Intervention.
Jennifer Boddy is a Senior Lecturer in Social Work at Griffith University,
Queensland, Australia where she is programme director for the Master of
Social Work (Qualifying) degree. Much of her scholarship is focused around
community development, environmental social work and feminism. She is
particularly interested in understanding and addressing the impacts of climate
change on disadvantaged populations such as older people, women and those
living in poverty. She is currently reviewing social work education nationally
for content on ecosocial work practice, while also working on embedding
environmental social work issues into core social work courses. She was also
selected to participate in the Australian Academy of Science 2014 Theo Murphy

18. Contributors xiii
High Flyers’ Think Tank on Climate Change Challenges to Health: Risks and
Opportunities, and co-authored Hetherington, T. and Boddy, J. 2013. Ecosocial
work with marginalized populations: Time for action on climate change, in
Environmental Social Work, edited by M. Gray, J. Coates and T. Hetherington,
Routledge, 46–61.
Heather Boetto is a lecturer at Charles Sturt University, Australia, and is in the
final stages of her PhD researching in the area of ecosocial work. She has several
publications relating to ecosocial work, particularly in relation to ecosocial work
education and practice. Her most recent publication, Boetto, H. 2016. Developing
Eco-social Work for Micro Level Practice (in press) outlines an ecosocial
work framework for integrating theory with micro level practice, including
detailed strategies for day-to-day interaction with individuals and families. She
has presented her research at various international conferences in relation to
sustainability, ecosocial work practice, professional ethics, gender and climate
change.
Wendy Bowles is Professor of Social Work at Charles Sturt University. Before
that she was a social worker in the disability field. She is Discipline Leader of
Social Work and Human Services and Sub-Dean of Workplace Learning for the
Faculty of Arts. Her research and publications focus on ethics, sustainability,
rural social work and welfare issues, disability and field education. She has co-
authored two books: Research for Social Workers: An Introduction to Methods
(3rd ed.) and Ethical Practice in Social Work an Applied Approach as well as
various book chapters and journal articles. Her latest publication on ecosocial
work is the co-authored conference paper: McKinnon, J., Bowles, W., Boetto, H.
and Jones, P. F. 2014. Is Social Work Really Greening? Exploring the Place of
Sustainability in Social Work Codes of Ethics, in Abstracts from the Joint World
Conference on Social Work, Education and Social Development 2014.
Susanne Elsen is Professor for Social Science at the Free University of Bolzano,
Italy and coordinator of the PhD programme. She has broad experience in
community development, solidarity, economy and participatory action research
in different regions of the world. Her current publications include: Elsen, S. and
Schicklinski, J. 2016. Mobilising the citizens for eco-social transition, in Cities in
Transition: Pathways to a Resilient Future, edited by T. Sauer, S. Elsen and Ch.
Garzillo. Oxford: Earthscan; and Elsen, S. 2015. Gemeinwesen, Gemeingüter und
ökosoziale Wende, in Die Kunst des Wandels, edited by S. Elsen and G. (Hrsg.)
Reifer. München: oekom Verlag.
Jorge M. L. Ferreira has a PhD in Social Work with a focus on Social Work,
Social Policies and Society. Presently he is Professor at ISCTE University Institute
of Lisbon, Director of the Graduate programme and the Doctoral programme in
Social Work and Deputy Director of the Department of Political Science and
Public Policy. His areas of research are: theoretical and applied research of social

19. xiv Contributors
work in community settings; children, family and adults in socially vulnerable
situations; social protection systems; and social policies. He is a member of the
editorial board of several national and international journals of social work.
Dorothy N. Gamble is Clinical Associate Professor Emerita of Social Work
at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill where she taught courses in
sustainable development and citizen participation. She is co-author of the book
Gamble, D. N. and Weil, M. 2009. Community Practice Skills: Local to Global
Perspectives and author of articles in Weil, M., Reisch, M. S. and Ohmer, M.
L. (eds) 2012 The Handbook of Community Practice. (2nd edn) that focus on
participatory methods, sustainable community development and models on the
changing context of community practice.
Tuula Helne works as a senior researcher in the Social Insurance Institution of
Finland Kela. Her current research interests are sustainable wellbeing, ecosocial
policy and sustainable food production and consumption. She has co-authored
or co-edited four books on ecosocial policy in Finnish and has published several
articles on the topic in national and international journals. The most recent,
Wellbeing and sustainability: A relational approach, was co-authored with Tuuli
Hirvilammi. Her previous research topics cover social exclusion, social insurance
and social injustices as well as the history of the Finnish social security through
cinema.
Subhangi M. K. Herath is a senior lecturer in the Department of Sociology,
University of Colombo, Sri Lanka and has thirty years of experience in teaching
sociology at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels. She did her postdoctoral
studies at the University of Sussex, UK. Her main research and teaching interests
are sociological theory, gender studies, sociology of environment, deviance,
crime and social justice and social issues. She was the key person in introducing
social work studies at the Department of Sociology at the University of Colombo
with the academic collaboration of the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia. Her
recent publications include Displacing Women, Resettling Families: Impact of
Landslides on Women’s Land Tenure Rights in Sri Lanka in Gender and Land
Tenure in the Context of Disaster in Asia, edited by K. Kusakabe, R. Shrestha,
and N. Veena, 2015, pp. 33–48; Indian Ocean Tsunami and its Influence on the
Resurgence of Social Work as an Academic Discipline in Sri Lanka, 2016, The
European Journal of Social Work (forthcoming).
Tuuli Hirvilammi has a PhD in Social Sciences and currently works as a
postdoctoral researcher at the University of Jyväskylä, Kokkola University
Consortium in a research project on ecosocial transition, which is funded by
the Academy of Finland. In her doctoral dissertation, In Search of Sustainable
Wellbeing – Integrating Ecological Issues into Wellbeing Research (2015,
in Finnish), she studied the theories and transdisciplinary methodologies of

20. Contributors xv
sustainable wellbeing research. She has also co-authored two books and several
articles on ecosocial policy, sustainable consumption and degrowth economy.
Bipin Jojo is a Professor of Social Work in the Centre for Social Justice and
Governance, School of Social Work at Tata Institute of Social Sciences, India.
He is engaged in social work with a tribal/indigenous perspective, working with
groups, development-induced displacement, resettlement and rehabilitation
and participatory development. His recent publications include: Sjöberg, S.,
Rambaree, K. and Jojo, B. 2015. Collective empowerment: A comparative
study of community work in Mumbai and Stockholm, International Journal
of Social Welfare, 24(4); Jojo, B. 2013. Decline of Ashram schools in central
and eastern India, Social Change 43(3); and Jojo, B. 2013. People’s movement
for accountable electoral politics and empowerment of tribals, in Governance,
Development and Human Service Professionals, edited by C. S. Ramanathan and
S. Dutta. Routledge.
Mari Kattilakoski is a researcher and doctoral student of social sciences at
the University of Eastern Finland, Joensuu. Her research interests address
rural welfare services and their development based on citizen participation and
communities. She recently published the following articles and congress papers:
Kattilakoski, M. and Rantamäki, N. 2015. Citizen Participation in the Context of
Rural Local Welfare Systems, Online Proceedings of European Society for Rural
Sociology Congress, 18–21 August 2015; and Matthies, A.-L, Kattilakoski, M.
and Rantamäki, N. 2011. Citizens’ participation and community orientation –
indicators of social sustainability of rural welfare services, Nordic Social Work
Research 2011 vol. 1.
Teea Kortetmäki is a doctoral researcher in the Department of Social Sciences
and Philosophy at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland. She studies environmental
and ecological justice as the main topics of her doctoral dissertation. She is also
involved in food system studies and is particularly interested in the questions
about food justice and sustainable food systems. With the paper Food Security
and Ethics: The First World Hunger, she won the vonne Lund Prize for the best
student paper and poster at the 2015 EurSafe Congress of Food Ethics. The text
has been published in the book Know Your Food: Food Ethics and Innovation
(EurSafe 2015).
Vesna Leskošek is Associate Professor at the University of Ljubljana and the Dean
of the Faculty of Social Work. Her main fields of research are social inequalities
and the welfare state. Currently she focuses on the development of community
economy in Slovenia. Recently she has co-authored two books: Leskošek, v.
2013. Violence Against Women in Slovenia and Leskošek, v. 2013. Working Poor
in Slovenia.

21. xvi Contributors
Aila-Leena Matthies, PhD in Social Sciences, is Professor of Social Work at
the University of Jyväskylä, Kokkola University Consortium. She has been
publishing about the ecosocial perspective of social work in Finnish, German
and English since the late 1980s. Her current publications in English related to
ecological social work are: Matthies, A.-L. and Närhi, K. forthcoming in 2016.
Conceptual and historical analysis of ecological social work, in Ecological
Social Work: Towards Sustainability, edited by J. McKinnon and M. Alston; and
Matthies, A.-L., Kattilakoski, M. and Rantamäki, N. 2011. Citizens’ participation
and community orientation: Indicators of social sustainability of rural welfare
services. Nordic Social Work Research, vol. 1. Her further research interest focuses
on comparative studies of citizen participation and welfare service systems,
particularly in regard to social work and disadvantaged urban and rural areas. She
recently co-edited a book: Matthies, A.-L. and Uggerhoej, L. 2014. Participation,
Marginalisation and Welfare Services: Concepts, Politics and Practices Across
European Countries. Ashgate.
Kati Närhi, PhD in Social Work, is Professor of Social Work in the Department
of Social Sciences and Philosophy, University of Jyväskylä, Finland. Her main
research interests are ecosocial approach in social work, ecosocial transition,
community social work, structural social work, participation and user involvement.
Her doctoral thesis The Eco-social Approach in Social Work and the Challenges
to the Expertise of Social Work was the first PhD thesis in this research area in
Finland. Recent publication: Närhi, K. and Matthies, A.-L. 2016. Conceptual and
historical analysis of ecological social work, in Ecological Social Work: Toward
Sustainability, edited by J. McKinnon and M. Alston. Palgrave Macmillan.
Jef Peeters, PhD sciences and MA philosophy, has taught amongst other things
social philosophy and social and professional ethics on the social work course
at Leuven University College, Belgium. He headed a research project on social
work and sustainable development and continues as a research fellow of the
Center for Citizenship and Participation, UC Leuven-Limburg. In addition to two
books in Dutch on the topic, he has published the following articles: Peeters,
J. 2012. Sustainable development: A mission for social work? A normative
approach. Journal of Social Intervention; and Peeters, J. 2012. Social work and
sustainable development: Towards a social-ecological practice model. Journal of
Social Intervention.
Meredith C. F. Powers is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Social
Work at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, USA. Her current
research includes the professional socialization of social workers, ecological
justice and university-community partnerships for sustainability. She serves on
the Environmental Justice Committee for the Council on Social Work Education
(CSWE). She established and administers the growing online network Green/
Environmental Social Work Collaborative Network for social workers around the
world who are committed to ecological justice.

22. Contributors xvii
Komalsingh Rambaree is an Associate Professor of Social Work at the University
of Gävle in Sweden. He teaches in the field of international social work and his
research areas are ecosocial work, community-based social work, qualitative
data analysis, and internet and adolescent sexuality. His recent publications
related to ecosocial work include: Sjöberg, S., Rambaree, K. and Jojo, B. 2015.
Collective empowerment: A comparative study of community work in Mumbai and
Stockholm. International Journal of Social Welfare, 24(4); Rambaree, K and Ryan,
T. 2014. Stray dogs and social work in Mauritius: An analysis of some concerns
and challenges, in Animals in Social Work: Why and How they Matter, edited by T.
Ryan. Palgrave Macmillan; and Rambaree, K. 2013. Social work and sustainable
development: Local voices from Mauritius. Australian Social Work, 66(2).
Sylvia Ramsay completed her Masters of Social Work (Qualifying) at Griffith
University, Queensland, Australia in 2015. She has also worked for five years
with permaculturalists and became an executive member of her local permaculture
organization. Sylvia’s life-long interest in environmentalism drew her to
environmental social work, and she undertook a study that involved a literature
review and concept analysis as part of her Master’s degree. In the summer of
2014/2015 Sylvia was awarded a scholarship under the Population and Social
Health Research Programme to explore the values of permaculture through
qualitative research. Sylvia is interested in learning methods that empower people
to become more sustainable.
Niina Rantamäki is a researcher and doctoral student of Social Work at the
University of Jyväskylä, Kokkola University Consortium Chydenius. Her
research interests are directed towards the role of citizens and civic organizations
as designers, organizers and providers of social services, especially in a rural
context. Her current research project is focused on local welfare service models
that support the fluency of everyday life in rural areas in Western and Eastern
Finland. She has recently published the following articles: Kattilakoski, M. and
Rantamäki, N. 2015. Citizen Participation in the Context of Rural Local Welfare
Systems, Online Proceedings of European Society for Rural Sociology Congress,
18-21 August 2015; and Matthies, A.-L., Kattilakoski, M. and Rantamäki, N.
2011. Citizens’ participation and community orientation: Indicators of social
sustainability of rural welfare services. Nordic Social Work Research, vol. 1.
Satu Ranta-Tyrkkö, PhD, is a Postdoctoral Researcher at the School of Social
Sciences and Humanities, University of Tampere. She is currently working on
postdoctoral research, funded by the Academy of Finland, on the consequences of
the mining industry for disadvantaged groups in Northern Finland and Northern
Odisha. She has been interested in voluntary and popular social work in India
throughout her research career, including her PhD thesis: Ranta-Tyrkkö, S.
2010. At the Intersection of Theatre and Social Work in Orissa, India. This is
an ethnography of the East Indian theatre group Natya Chetana (Theatre for
Awareness) and the group’s theatre work as popular social work. She has also

23. xviii Contributors
published several articles on Gandhian social work, postcolonial issues in social
work and international social work. Her other interest areas are community work,
ecosocial work, interfaces of social work and arts, indigenous social work, local–
global continuums in social work and ethnographic research.
Benjamin Shepard, PhD, LMSW, is an Associate Professor of Human Services
at City Tech/CUNY. He has performed organizing work with various urban
citizens’ movements as an activist. He is also the author or editor of several
books: Shepard, B. 2009. Queer Political Performance and Protest. Routledge;
Shepard, B. and Smithsimon, G. 2011. The Beach Beneath the Streets: Contesting
New York’s Public Spaces. SUNY Press; Shepard, B. 2011. Play, Creativity, and
Social Movements: If I Can’t Dance, It’s Not My Revolution. Routledge; Shepard,
B. 2014. Community Projects as Social Activism: From Direct Action to Direct
Services. Sage; and Shepard, B. 2015. Rebel Friendships: ‘Outsider’ Networks
and Social Movements. Palgrave.
Tiina Silvasti is Professor of Social and Public Policy in the Department of
Social Sciences and Philosophy at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland. She
has studied the social consequences of structural change in agriculture covering
also environmental issues. Her recent research interests focus on food system
studies, especially First World hunger and food aid delivery in wealthy Western
countries. She has recently published: Silvasti, T. 2015. Food Aid: Normalising
the Abnormal in Finland, Social Policy and Society, 14(3), 471-482; Brunori,
G. and Silvasti, T. (2015). Food security during climate change: The challenge
of European diversity, in Climate Change Adaptation and Food Supply Chain
Management, edited by A. Paloviita and M. Järvelä. Routledge; and Riches, G.
and Silvasti, T. (eds) 2014. First World Hunger Revisited. Food Charity or the
Right to Food? Palgrave MacMillan.
Romana Zidar is a licensed social worker and supervisor for the social services.
She graduated from the Faculty of Social Work, University of Ljubljana and
gained an MA in Management of Non-profit Organisations from the Faculty of
Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana. She is presently preparing her PhD on
social marketing and working as a field associate for The UN Refugee Agency.
Her research interests include social marketing, social psychology, community
organizing, social economy, social development and protection.

24. 1 Introduction
It is the time for social work and
social policy research on the ecosocial
transition
Aila-Leena Matthies and Kati Närhi
Context and background of the book
Be it global climate change or the wars rooted in the global oil business, both
of which are causing fathomless human suffering and forced migration, the
manifold interconnections between environmental crisis, economic cupidity,
social catastrophes and cultural losses are becoming increasingly evident to
everybody. The economic models aiming at constant economic growth at any
price have already crossed over the ecological limits of the Earth, but economic
reasoning still dominates public attention and political efforts (Crouch 2012).
However, instead of deferring to pessimism and cynics, numerous critical
scholars, practitioners and movements around the globe and across different
sectors are quite advanced in seeking practical models towards more viable and
resilient conditions for the current and next generations. These efforts can be
gathered together to form a comprehensive process of transition of societies
towards sustainability. The main areas of the transition address new economic
and environmental solutions, especially those built on new sources of energy
beyond peak oil. What has not yet been comprehensively focused on is the social
embeddedness of this transition, which matters more than the conventional
understanding of social sustainability. For the context of this book, where we
focus on the perspective of social work and social policy, it is important to
consider that the paradigmatic change of a society addressed by the transition
has direct linkage to social work and social policy. The ecosocial transition of
societies brings about the following questions:
• What kind of welfare state, social services and support for the social life of
communities are sustainable without the current model of economic growth
and environmental hazards?
• What kind of understanding of the role of the social professions can strengthen
an ecosocial transition of society?
• Without these practical reflections, the balance between the three dimensions
of economy, ecology and social development, well-known as a concept of
sustainability, seems to remain only as a theoretical concept.

25. 2 Aila-Leena Matthies and Kati Närhi
Over the past few years, the debate on sustainable development, ecosocial,
ecological, green or environmental social work has grown into one of the most
dynamic global topics of the discipline and profession. However, the discussion
about the connection between environmental issues and social work is not new
as it has been written about in publications since the 1980s (Schwendter 1981,
Opielka 1985, Mühlum 1986, Blanke and Sachsse 1987, Matthies 1987, Naess
1989, Närhi and Matthies 2001). Some authors even discuss the first ecological
thoughts of social work pioneers such as Jane Addams from more than a hundred
years ago (Staub-Bernasconi 1989, Dominelli 2012, Närhi and Matthies 2016).
What is relatively new, though, is the globalization of the ecosocial debate in social
work as it previously used to be separated geographically and in terms of language,
due to using diverse concepts. We are now witnessing a noticeable movement
towards a shared theoretical and operational discussion about the ecological or
ecosocial approach in social work at the global level of the social work community.
Environmental issues have held a prominent position at several international
conferences, which has produced a new global networking of scholars and
practitioners engaged in environmental social work. The same dynamic movement
is also visible in a range of publications. Two journals – Critical Social Work and
the Journal of International Welfare – published special issues on environmental
social work in 2012. During the same year, Lena Dominelli published a book
called Green Social Work (Dominelli 2012), which focuses on environmental
disaster, pollution and conflicts, along with human rights, poverty and inequality
and develops guidelines for social work practitioners to intervene in environmental
crises. In the same year also an edited book called Environmental Social Work
(Gray et al. 2012) was published, which gathers together authors from different
continents. The book explores the conceptual perspectives on environmental social
work and uses case studies to illustrate practices. One of the books based on the
conference papers of the International Conference of Social Work in Stockholm in
2012 focuses on environmental change and sustainable social development (Hessle
2014). A new text book edited by Margaret Alston and Jennifer McKinnon – with
contributions from international authors – was published in 2016.
However, what still needs to be strengthened, besides the valuable practice-
oriented and programmatic efforts, is the research of ecosocial transition from the
perspective of social work and social policy. At the international conferences of
social work in Stockholm 2012 and in Melbourne 2014 online-based networking
was established with those social work scholars and practitioners interested
in the environmental paradigm in social work. Through these networks it was
possible for us to identify colleagues worldwide who are involved in related
research and to invite twenty of them to the University of Jyväskylä, Finland, to
a symposium and workshop to work on the topic and on this volume. We have
collected together selected research scholars who are interested in sharing and
contributing knowledge about the role of social work and social policy in the
ecosocial transition of societies in interdisciplinary collaboration. The circle of
authors consists of international authors, with a European focus, who are doing
research on this topic. Both of the editors are nationally and internationally

26. Introduction 3
involved figures in the ecosocial approach in social work (Närhi and Matthies
2001, 2016, Matthies et al. 2001, 2011, Matthies and Närhi 1998, 2014, Närhi
2004). In the meantime, the Academy of Finland decided to fund a four-year
research project called ‘The Contribution of Social Work and Systems of Income
Security to the Ecosocial Transformation of Society’, which is also essentially
based on international collaboration on the topic.
The aim of this book is to carry on the development of the existing debates
and to strengthen the environmental paradigm in social work research. In contrast
to the previous publications, our book emphasizes the research around this
paradigm. This is achieved through further research on theoretical and conceptual
clarification as well as through distinct reflection on its various practical
directions. And although we claim that this strengthens the research base of the
ecosocial transition of social work and social policy, this is not beneficial only for
the academic. In fact, we regard, that especially in such applied scientific areas as
social work and social policy, it is the role of research to provide research-based
knowledge and tools for critical reflection for the practitioners, NGOs, activists
and educators as well.
The second special aim of this book is to bring together social work and social
policy knowledge regarding the perspective of the ecosocial transition of societies.
While on the one hand there is a need to develop further social work’s own
environmental paradigm theoretically and conceptually, as well as its research-
based knowledge, it is important to realize how it contributes to the overall joint
efforts of various other sciences, agencies and movements that are trying to solve
the core future challenges of the Earth. On the other hand, it is not only social
sciences like social work and social policy which need to be aware of their own
role in the interdisciplinary efforts of transition. This volume may for its part also
inform other scientific areas like economics and environmental sciences about
the question of why social work and social policy may be relevant for promoting
transition towards sustainability.
In addition, the chapters will focus on the research of solutions to ecological,
social or economic challenges of ecosocial transition rather than on the analysis
of the problems. In the context of ecosocial transition the basic assumption is
that a change, a transition towards an ecologically and socially balanced society
at the global and local level, is indispensable and urgent. The transition debates
highlight that the dominance of the current economic system does not only cause
environmental damage and the destruction of natural resources but also increases
social inequality. The core of the ecosocial transition is based on economic de-
and post-growth models of society. These are discussed in several chapters of this
book from the perspective of social work and social policy. The global ecocritical
discussion of social work argues that the sustainable development of society
means, among other things, a substantial reduction in the consumption of natural
resources, the equitable distribution of wealth as well as a new vision of humanity
and the planet’s wellbeing. This will require ecosocial transition in all areas of
societies: in its ecological, technological, economic, social, political as well as
structural and institutional dimensions.

27. 4 Aila-Leena Matthies and Kati Närhi
Social work and social policy are especially challenged to provide knowledge
on how to move towards social sustainability and resilience in the process of
ecosocial transition. For instance, issues of food, land ownership and climate
change are highly related to social work and social policy and not only to poverty
and inequality. As discussed in the chapter by Tuula Helne and Tuuli Hirvilammi,
the question arises of how to establish a new understanding of wellbeing that is
both affordable ecologically and economically, yet still socially just.
Consequently, the debate on ecological social work contests not only the
current economic model of developed societies but also reflects critically on social
work’s current institutional and professional models, which are dependent on the
problematic economic model of societies. Therefore, the core of the ecosocial
transition is based on new economic alternatives of society, including the idea of
the commons and community economy, as discussed by Susanne Elsen and Jef
Peeters in this book.
One of the central theses in the ecosocial paradigm is that an environmental
crisis is a social crisis, as it increases social inequality and causes the highest level
of problems for the most vulnerable citizens in societies (Opielka 1985, Elsen 2011,
Dominelli 2012, Gray et al. 2012, Närhi and Matthies 2001, Matthies and Närhi
2014). Although the profession is becoming increasingly aware of ecological issues,
there is limited attention given to ‘how to’ incorporate this awareness into practice
(McKinnon 2008). Several chapters of this book present and analyze such practical
developments. On the one hand, ecosocial transition is theoretically rooted in the
traditions of critical theory and challenges the belief in technological–economic
rationality, which is seen to colonialize the natural resources of the human living
world (Lebenswelt by Jürgen Habermas). On the other hand, the ecosocial paradigm
is linked to systems-theoretical holistic modelling of interdisciplinary and inter-
sectoral relationships (Peeters 2012, Wendt 2010, Närhi and Matthies 2001). As
Saywer (2008: 1751) states, the ecosocial criteria of development aim at protecting
the discrimination of poor communities in environmental interventions. Crucial to
sustainability is the opportunity for the most marginalized people to participate fully
in all activities and decision-making and to receive the benefits of this participation
(also resilience, Walker et al. 2004, Peeters 2012, Estes 1993: 3). Sustainable
growth is understood as an equitable downscaling of production and consumption
that increases human wellbeing and enhances ecological conditions at the local and
global level, both in the short-term and long-term. The paradigmatic propositions
of de-growth are that the currently dominating understanding of economic growth
is not sustainable and that human progress without it is possible (Nussbaum 2011,
Crouch 2012, Schneider et al. 2010, Jackson 2009).
In this book our main objective is to constitute social work and social policy
as a part of the more comprehensive and interdisciplinary debate on the ecosocial
transition of societies towards sustainability by balancing economic and social
development with the limited resources of the natural environment. The book
discusses how social work and social policy contribute to this transition. By focusing
on different aspects, all chapters share a clear perspective of social work and social
policy and a research-based approach in their analysis and argumentation.

28. Introduction 5
Content of the book
Besides the introduction and conclusion chapters, the book consists of five
parts that provide research-based knowledge and regard the contribution of
social work and social policy from multiple viewpoints. After the introduction,
the core concepts of ecosocial transition in the frame of social work and social
policy will be discussed in Part I. Part II presents examples of empirical studies
on how environmental challenges are tackled as social work or social political
interventions. In , the efforts of ecosocial transition are analyzed in urban
and rural communities and lifestyles that are aiming at practical sustainability.
Part Iv addresses social political and social work-related research on food politics
from various perspectives. In Part v, change to the profession of social work as a
reflection on the required paradigmatic shift and ecosocial transition is discussed.
Finally, there is a concluding chapter by the editors.
Concepts
Discussion about ecosocial transition and related concepts still holds a novelty
position in the disciplines of social work and social policy in most countries.
Correspondingly, most of the interdisciplinary scholars involved in research and
practice of transition towards sustainability may not have thought about their
research topic in relation to the issues relevant in social work and social policy, like
poverty or human relationships. Therefore, establishes a basic conceptual
frame for the entire book with four essential concepts: ecosocial transition, a new
concept of wellbeing, the commons and the community economy. In doing so the
chapters in the first part also introduce the debate about de-growth from several
points of view of social work and social policy.
Aila-Leena Matthies introduces and defines the concept of ecosocial transition
and related concepts as well in order to map out the interdisciplinary field to
which social work and social policy may contribute. She presents the concept’s
genealogic and scientific background through a comparison of the concepts of The
Great Transformation (Polanyi 1944) of industrial economy and the current post-
growth and post-peak oil transition. Then she explains the emerging forms of how
transition appears: as scientific efforts and transformative research, as political
structures and interventions and as increasing actions of social movements and
civil society. The author critically analyzes how the social dimensions of the
ecosocial transition are as yet understood quite narrowly.
Continuing the conceptual frame for sustainable social policy and social
work, Tuula Helne and Tuuli Hirvilammi introduce a new concept of relational
wellbeing. It is based on the criticism of the fact that the prevailing wellbeing
with material wealth has had ecological consequences that threaten human
wellbeing and survival. They argue that maintaining the status quo and holding
on to the current conception of wellbeing are not an option if sustainability is to be
achieved. Instead, a sounder understanding of wellbeing is needed for ecosocial
transition. It involves setting limits on wealth and unsustainable consumption and

29. 6 Aila-Leena Matthies and Kati Närhi
shifts the focus away from mere Having towards placing value on Loving, Being
and responsible and meaningful Doing. The model is founded on a conception of
the human being as connected to its social and natural environment and is thus a
self-evident agent of the ecosocial work that the sustainability transition requires.
Moreover, the conceptualization of relational wellbeing highlights ties to other
people and the dependence of the individual’s wellbeing on the community he or
she lives in.
Although the theories of ecosocial transition concern global and national
development, most of their practical implementations are specifically local. There
are already concrete scenarios and practised models of ecosocial transition built
by local communities, a new type of self-sufficiency and social justice as well as
economic and ecological sustainability in urban and rural communities. Projects
include, for example, solidarity economy models such as cooperatives, micro-
credits and local currency. To analyze these, Susanne Elsen introduces the concept
of community-based economy. The author analyzes the historical development
and over-historical principles of community-based economy. Finally she presents
new cooperatives, urban agriculture and community-supported agriculture as case
studies of community economy, claiming more social justice and responsibility
for communities. She concludes that community-economy models appear due to
a lack of other means of securing one’s livelihood or as an explicit and reflected
ecosocial concept to infringements through the globalized market economy.
Jef Peeters concludes Part I with the relatively new economic concept of the
commons, which refers to indispensable resources with definable boundaries and
which can be preserved most easily if kept in local community ownership; this
can also stabilize the community socially and economically. He contends that this
concept is often put forward as the basis for a more inclusive and just society. He
investigates the concept of commons in the recent literature and evaluates the
strengths and opportunities of it from the perspective of ecosocial transition and
social work.
Tackling challenges and complexities
In Part II, the impacts of environmental crises and tackling them will be analyzed
systematically from the perspective of what kind of challenge they pose for social
work and social policy, as well as the solution to how they can be faced. This
part points out selected kinds of challenges and complexities in the process of
ecosocial transition that are emerging especially outside of the global north. All
the chapters address the issue of local and global power and the advantages and
disadvantages of tackling the challenges. Especially, the aim of these researches
is to demonstrate how the transition is layered and complex, including the role
and scopes of activism. Also social work is discussed here in broader terms,
including academic and professional expertise as well as involvement of citizens’
movements.
Margaret Alston, by setting the issue of the book more concretely in the global
picture in her chapter, opens the perspective of ecosocial transition in the global

30. Introduction 7
south. She draws on social work research undertaken in Australia and the Asia-
Pacific region to both discuss the significant social and gendered challenges
created by climate changes and to outline a social work response. In the research
on the global south, which is particularly vulnerable to climate change, the
researchers investigated, for instance, rising food and water insecurity, poverty
and dislocation as well as critical gendered impacts. In her chapter, ecosocial
transition incorporates attention to environmental, social and gender justice
together and critiques neoliberal policy formulations that are exacerbating these
demands for justice. She points especially to the imbalance between the regions:
countries in the global south are more vulnerable not only because of their
environmental fragility, but also because of social factors that shape the capacity of
people and communities to mitigate the worst effects of these challenges. Despite
this region being amongst the most vulnerable to climate-induced disasters, many
global south countries are amongst those least likely to have contributed to global
warming through the production of greenhouse gases.
Satu Ranta-Tyrkkö and Bibin Jojo have studied the challenges of Adivasi-
centred and ecosocially oriented social work in an Indian mining region.
Mining projects are significant examples of the use of natural resources being in
contradiction with other uses of the same soil and bringing about disturbance to,
and displacement of, livelihoods and people. The benefits and the risks of mining
projects are often unevenly divided: while some benefit, others may be adversely
affected.
However, the traditions of social work differ a lot between the regions of
concern. In his chapter Komalsingh Rambaree argues that environmental justice
requires an ecosocial transition through sustainable development initiatives. To
give a practical example of how social work can act in environmental conflicts
and apply environmental justice, he analyzes a case study of a people’s renewable
energy cooperative by describing the environmental activism in Mauritius. The
context of the study is the enormous challenge in regard to the demand for energy
that is causing a conflict between the interests of a multinational company and the
civil society movement: the former has plans for a coal-power investment, while
the latter is suggesting solar-based power plants organized through a cooperative
basis. By using this case, the author analyzes how political instrumentalism
affects ecosocial transition movement and practice, and how an environmental
justice approach is applied within ecosocial transition movements and practices.
Sustainable communities and lifestyles
Although the theories of ecosocial transition concern global and national
development, most of their practical implementations are specifically local, and
they are addressed by the researches of Part III. There are already well-established
scenarios and practised models built on local communities; a new type of self-
sufficiency and social justice in urban and rural communities are growing. The
aim of this part is to contribute to more interdisciplinary research approaches
to ecosocial transition. Coherent concepts shared by the chapters refer to a

31. 8 Aila-Leena Matthies and Kati Närhi
community perspective of wellbeing. It includes personal wellbeing and how
much it is supported by the community, including space for one’s own activism
and engagement, as well as a sense of belonging and connectedness. Here also
classic social scientific terms such as social capital and community find their
space. At the same time two partly contrasting theoretical implications related to
the need of interdisciplinarity are discussed. The systems-theoretical organizing
of the ecological perspective into micro-, meso- and macro-levels on the one hand
and the complexity theory applied to understand the intersections of needs and
resources in rural provision of subsistence and wellbeing, on the other hand, are
both involved.
Four chapters present research examples of urban and rural community
approaches in settings where ecological, economic and social transitions become
very concrete. Helena Belchior Rocha and Jorge M. L. Ferreira identify indicators
of ecological sustainability in socially vulnerable communities and propose an eco-
model for social sustainability. Their case studies address two socio-environmental
pilot projects in Portugal and two international eco-neighbourhoods where
holistic sustainability has been a core objective of urban community intervention
programmes. In their chapter, the contribution of social work in this kind of
multidisciplinary effort is highlighted in order to provide research-based knowledge
on the interrelationship of different dimensions and professions.
The chapter by Ben Shephard analyzes the ecosocial activism of social
movements and social work close to urban civil society. He focuses on the
connection of environmental and social urban activism in New York, where
transforming brownfields into community gardens, bike lanes and non-polluting
transportation as models of sustainable urbanism are connected to urban climate
protection and also to new types of social participation. Through street ethnography
and participant observation of social change movements, the chapter explores the
interconnections between street activism and social history and reflects upon what
impact can be achieved through the merging of direct action for a more humane
model of cities. At the same time, this chapter also provides an autobiographic
view of the social worker as an activist.
Balancing these urban views of New York, the chapter by Mari Kattilakoski
and Niina Rantamäki analyzes two cases of community-based local welfare
systems in rural areas of Finland. By the concept of local welfare systems (LWS)
the authors refer to models that have arisen in rural areas that emphasize the
local perspective and collaboration across different sectors, which is in contrast
to the main stream of centralization, specialization and the marketing of welfare
services. The comparative research setting comprises case studies between two
regions and applies complexity theories to analyze the development, structure
and operation of the LWS. In addition, if the LWS promote citizens’ participation
and the bottom-up perspective, the ecological and economic dimensions of
ecosocial transition progress and result in shorter circles and better targeting of
services, thus increasing resources through cooperation between different actors.
Therefore, recognition of unique local dimensions of welfare is needed as well as
a new wider concept of welfare.

32. Introduction 9
The faceted practice–research-based picture of sustainable communities and
lifestyles is complemented by the chapter by Heather Boetto and Wendy Bowles,
who analyze the wisdom and experiences of older Australians who develop
sustainable living practices in later life. In contrast to research that conceptualize
elderly people mainly from a service-provider perspective, this research takes a
‘strengths’ approach to explore the solutions members of the aging population have
initiated in order to address environmental decline. Using a phenomenological
methodology, the research explores the experiences and strategies of older rural
and regional citizens as they attempt to protect the natural environment with their
own sustainable lifestyles. The aim is to learn lessons from the wisdom of the
elders that social workers and policy makers can apply in wider society.
The chapter by Jennifer Boddy and Sylvia Ramsay presents a narrative
research approach to permaculture that is known as a social change movement
that promotes local production, the importance of community and fair share
instead of individual premises. The study of ten permaculturalists demonstrates
how this movement emerges as an economic, ecological and social transition
of the individuals involved in a local not-for-profit organization established by
community members and guided by the ethics of permaculture. Therefore, is it
reasonable to identify permaculture and its ethics as methodic tools of social work
in community development and also in the ecosocial support of individuals.
Food politics
A noticeable and practice-based bridge from social work and social policy to
economy and ecology is emerging in the extremely topical issue of food, which
relates to a broad range of questions in regard to poverty and charity, land
ownership and market as well as climate change and other ecological disasters.
In their chapter, Tiina Silvasti and Teea Kortetmäki examine ethical tensions
between the ethos of Nordic welfare universalism and charity food delivery in the
context of the environmental goal to reduce food waste by delivering surpluses
as charity food aid. During the last twenty years in Finland, one of the world’s
richest countries, charity food aid – based on donated food and delivered by
voluntary workers in food banks and on bread lines – has become an established
way of fixing the holes in the public social safety net of the most vulnerable
people. This examination connects environmental ethics, especially its discussion
on environmental and social justice in the context of sustainability. The chapter
offers a reasonable and critical evaluation of the place of charity food aid practices
in the course of ecosocial transition.
Dorothy N. Gamble continues the debate of food and environment with an
analysis of the methods used in a nonprofit project called Farm to Table that
promotes food security and agricultural sustainability in a culturally and ecologically
sensitive setting. As fragile elements of the biosphere are being destroyed by human
pollution, the ability to produce nutritious food in an equitable way is threatened,
and climate change will reduce the needed moisture in the near future in the area
of New Mexico. The programme aims at understanding Native American, Hispanic

33. 10 Aila-Leena Matthies and Kati Närhi
and Anglo knowledge of food production and consumption and how that knowledge
evolves using information relating to soil health, climate change, water conservation,
childhood development and health concerns. The use of respectful engagement
techniques and the importance of human relationships and environmental concerns
become familiar to the community practice of social workers.
Also the chapter by Vesna Leskošek and Romana Zidar focuses on the complex
issue of food. In their analysis, they contrast the neoliberal policy that compensates
for poverty through organizations offering charity-based food distribution
programmes and models of self-organized food production of initiatives of
collectives, cooperatives and social enterprises, which are changing municipal
land into gardens for people that are interested in growing their own food. The
chapter presents the results of the qualitative study on the emancipatory potentials
and social–political impact of the models. The charity-based programmes do
not aim to eliminate poverty but instead mirror paternalism and citizens’ lack of
influence even on the content and the quality of their daily food. The more self-
initiated and participatory initiatives can create new communities that generate
social capital and can even in some forms influence local policies. This Slovenian
study provides a clear direction for social work and social policy in regard to how
to contribute to ecosocial transition.
Profession in transition
In Part vI, the changes in the profession and discipline of social work are discussed
from the perspective of ecosocial transition. The aim of this part is to point out
that as the societal context is changing and making ecosocial transition inevitable,
the social work profession should also keep pace in order to stay relevant to the
changing context and to bring about bigger social transition.
Subhangi M. K. Herath looks at the role of social workers in regard to
sustainable social development in the very urgent practical context of ecological
crisis. Regular landslides in Sri Lanka pose an ongoing threat to the social and
physical existence of people and are exacerbating existing vulnerabilities. The
author has conducted a qualitative study in a landslide-prone community to
identify the socio-economic attributes of landslides and their linkage to existing
socio-economic vulnerabilities, and their association with social development
and social policy measures as well as the role of social work. The need for a
new holistic approach to social work becomes evident and takes environmental
sustainability as its foundation to move away from the compartmentalized
approaches in addressing social issues. Working towards preventing natural
disasters and mitigating their impacts are seen as vital requisites. This research
suggests social workers in all roles and capacities take into account the imminent
environmental crisis. Although there are not currently many social workers
involved in environmental tasks, there are interdisciplinary groups addressing the
imminent environmental issues and social work could identify this gap and step
in. Thus, social work education must cater to this expanded understanding.

34. Introduction 11
Meredith C. F. Powers also argues for the increasing embracing by social workers
of an expanded professional identity that includes a response to the environmental
crisis. She presents qualitative research based on interviews looking at existing
social work practitioners and their interpretation of the socialization towards
environmentally involved social workers. She provides new in-depth knowledge
of how these individuals developed social work identities that included a response
to the environmental crisis even though the field of social work, as a whole,
remains reluctant to respond. A model of reciprocal professional socialization was
developed, which expands understanding of social work identity and the support
needed to infuse environmental concerns and transform the social work profession.
Finally, Kati Närhi returns to the historically most important principles in
social work practice and theory; the constellation of the ‘person in environment’.
Her chapter examines how this understanding has changed, since social work
practices have been organized differently during the last twenty years in Finland,
from being centred on the community-based generalistic models to being based on
specialized and centralized models. This comparative study across time examines
the various models of organizing social work practice that shape the practitioners’
understanding of the person in environment. The qualitative thematic analysis of
social workers’ group interviews compares three different organizational phases:
community-based social work practice during 1995–2000; the specialized model
of social work practice in 2006; and the centralized model of organizing social
work practice in 2015. The chapter analyzes how the organizational setting of
social work practice prohibits and advances social workers’ input on the ecosocial
transition of society. In the concluding chapter, the editors maintain a meta-analysis
of the book content in order to answer the core question set by the objective of this
book: What is, or what can be, the contribution of social work and social policy to
the ecosocial transition of societies? At this juncture, it is important to point out
that we understand social work here not only as the work done by social workers
but also as a movement, as the discipline of social work as well as a societal
institution of modern societies.
References
Blanke, T. and Sachsse, C. 1987. ökologisch helfen? Anmerkungen zur Kritik des
Sozialisationsstaates [To help ecologically? Remarks to critics of the socialization
state], in Umbau des Sozialstaats, edited by M. Opielka and I. Ostner. Essen: Klartext,
309–321.
Crouch, C. 2012. The Strange Non-death of Neoliberalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Dominelli, L. 2012. Green Social Work. From Environmental Crises to Environmental
Justice. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Elsen, S. (ed.) 2011. ökosoziale Transformation. [Ecosocial Transformation]. Solidarische
Ökonomie und die Gestaltung des Gemeinwesens. Neu-Ulm: AG SPAK Bücher.
Estes, R. 1993. Toward sustainable development: From theory to praxis. Social Development
Issues, 15(3), 1–29.
Gray, M., Coates, J. and Hetherington, T. (eds) 2012. Environmental Social Work. New
York: Routledge.

35. 12 Aila-Leena Matthies and Kati Närhi
Hessle, S. (ed.) 2014. Environmental Change and Sustainable Social Development. Surrey:
Ashgate.
Jackson, T. (2009). Prosperity Without Growth. Economics for a Finite Planet. London:
Earthscan.
Matthies, A-L. 1987. Ekologinen sosiaalityö. [Ecological Social Work]. Sosiaaliviesti, 2,
32–37.
Matthies, A-L., Kattilakoski, M. and Rantamäki, N. 2011. Citizens’ participation and
community orientation: Indicators of social sustainability of rural welfare services.
Nordic Social Work Research, 1(2), 125–139.
Matthies, A-L. and Närhi, K. (eds) 1998. Ekososiaalisia oivalluksia sosiaalityön arjesta
[Ecosocial insights from the everyday practice of social work], University of Jyväskylä,
Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy, Working Papers of Social Policy 102,
Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.
Matthies, A-L. and Närhi, K. 2014. Ekososiaalinen lähestymistapa rakenteellisen
sosiaalityön viitekehyksenä. [Eco-social approach as a framework for structural social
work], in Rakenteellinen sosiaalityö. Sosiaalityön tutkimuksen vuosikirja [Structural
social work. A yearbook of social work research], edited by M. Seppänen, A. Pohjola
and M. Laitinen. EU: Unipress, 87–116.
Matthies, A-L., Närhi, K. and Ward, D. (eds) 2001. The Eco-social Approach in Social
Work. Jyväskylä: Sophi.
McKinnon, J. 2008. Exploring the nexus between social work and the environment.
Australian Social Work, 61(3), 256–268.
Mühlum, A. 1986. Die ökosoziale perspektive [The ecosocial perspective], in Umwelt:
Lebenswelt. Beiträge zu Theorie und Praxis Ökosozialer Arbeit, edited by A. Mühlum,
G. Olschowsky, H. Oppl and W. R. Wendt. Frankfurt am Main: Diesterweg, 208–240.
Naess, A. 1989. Ecology, Community and Lifestyle: Outline of an Ecosophy. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Närhi, K. 2004. The eco-social approach in social work and the challenges to the expertise
of social work. Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social Research, 243.
Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.
Närhi, K. and Matthies, A.-L. 2001. What is the ecological (self)consciousness of social
work? Perspectives on the relationship between social work and ecology, in The Eco-
Social Approach in Social Work, edited by A.-L. Matthies, K. Närhi and D. Ward.
Jyväskylä: Sophi, 16–53.
Närhi, K. and Matthies, A.-L. 2016. Conceptual and historical analysis of ecological social
work, in Ecological Social Work: Toward Sustainability, edited by J. McKinnon and M.
Alston. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 21–38.
Nussbaum, M. C. 2011. Creating capabilities: The human development approach.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Opielka M. (ed.) 1985. Die Ökosoziale Frage. [The Ecosocial Question]. Frankfurt:
Fischer Taschenbuch.
Peeters, J. 2012. The place of social work in sustainable development: Towards ecosocial
practice. International Journal of Social Welfare, 21(3), 287–298.
Polanyi, K. 1944. The Great Transformation. The Political and Economic Origins of Our
Time. Boston: Beacon Press.
Sawyer, D. 2008. Climate change, biofuels and eco-social impacts in the Brazilian
Amazon and Cerrado. Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society [Online], B 363,
1747–1752. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2373893/
[accessed: 5 May 2016].

36. Introduction 13
Schneider, F., Kallis G. and Martinez-Alier J. 2010. Crisis or opportunity? Economic de-
growth for social equity and ecological sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production,
18, 511–518.
Schwendter, R. 1981. Alternativen in der Sozialarbeit [Alternatives in social work].
Informationsdienst Sozialarbeit 28/29. Offenbach: Verlag 2000 GmbH, 5–25.
Staub-Bernasconi, S. 1989. Soziale Arbeit und ökologie 100 Jahre vor der ökologischen
Wende [Social work and ecology 100 years before the ecological crisis]. Neue Praxis,
4(19), 283–309.
Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter S. R. and Kinzig, A. 2004. Resilience, adaptability and
transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 9(2), 5. Available
at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5/print.pdf [accessed: 5 November
2015].
Wendt, W. R. 2010. Das Ökosoziale Prinzip. [The Ecosocial Principle]. Freiburg:
Lambertus.

38. Part I
Concepts

40. 2 The conceptualization of
ecosocial transition
Aila-Leena Matthies
Introduction
The concept of ecosocial transition refers to the efforts of policy-makers,
activists and researchers towards creating sustainable changes both practically
and conceptually (Elsen 2011, Soots and Gismondi 2008, Fischer-Kowalski et al.
2012). Referring to sustainability, the concept of ecosocial transition combines
ecological, economic and social dimensions of development and is interested in the
interlinkage between social and ecological sustainability. An increasing number
of practical areas of action are addressed by the search for models of ecosocial
transition, like cultural life, food production and delivery, local governance,
transport and housing. This aims to clarify conceptual issues related to
ecosocial transition. It will provide a view of how ecosocial transition is promoted
and manifested for instance as scientific debate, policy-making and networks of
actions groups and movements. These are discussed from the perspective of social
work and social policy, although their role in ecosocial transition is not yet very
visible. Finally, the chapter will critically analyze how social dimensions are
understood in the transition movement and sustainability paradigm. The question
of how social work and social policy are essentially related to the core topics of
ecosocial transition will be looked at in this chapter.
Concepts in the ecosocial discourse
Transition and transformation
Different conceptual understandings of transitions and transformation exist
that refer to the programmatic debates that aim at promoting urgently needed
major changes in current societies in order to sustain the planet as a value per
se with an inherent worth and as a place for future human generations to live.
Referring to this change both as a process and result, the words transition and
transformation towards sustainability can be found in the literature in different
languages. The word transformation is used especially in the German literature
(Elsen 2011) when tracking back along the discussion paths of the paradigmatic
ecosocial change. On the other hand, while following the global discussion for
instance about transition towns, communities, (Hopkins 2011) and the transition

41. 18 Aila-Leena Matthies
movement (Hopkins 2008) also the decision to speak about ecosocial transition is
legitimated. According to the Cambridge Dictionaries Online (2015), transition
means ‘a change from one form or type to another, or the process by which this
happens’. In the same source, transformation means ‘a complete change in the
appearance or character of something or someone, especially so that that thing
or person is improved’ (ibid.). There seem to be nuanced differences between
transition and transformation in the aspect of their radicalism and whether the
emphasis is more on the process or its outcome. However, both words are used in
the broader scientific debate also outside of social work while discussing the same
concern: shifting the current destructive development of comprehensive areas of
society towards a more sustainable direction (Fischer-Kowalski et al. 2012, Bay
2013, Löwy 2014, Berger et al. 2014). However, it needs to be made clear that
besides this explicitly normative and action-oriented understanding of transition
and transformation, like in the context of this book, there is a much longer tradition
of scientific studies of historical transition processes. In the latter cases transition
is rather a neutral concept and more a synonym for change or development which
takes place and is just observed and studied without any intentions to influence it.
Anyway, by analogy with Karl Polanyi’s study The Great Transformation (Polanyi
1944) about the transition from a feudal to a capitalist economy, a growing global
network of scholars and civil society activists are speaking of a ‘Great Transition’
to a future of equity, solidarity and ecological sustainability. Among these are
the New Economics Foundation and especially the discussion network The Great
Transition Initiative (NEF 2015a). Hence, we are in good company even if we
decide to use the word transition in our book as a pragmatic solution to having one
concept throughout the book. But this background also suggests that this is not
an exclusive way of nominating the needed change. Keeping in mind the value of
various cultures of languages and scientific debates, we regard that the ongoing
ecosocial crisis does not allow scientists to get ‘lost in conceptual transition
debates’ or in the diversity of languages.
Both transition and transformation embed in this meaning a strong normative
and programmatic character of argumentation, which addresses political processes
from the local to global level, as well as practical models of changing different
areas of human life. Ecosocial transitions and transformations are indeed mainly
presented as political and practical programmes to follow in order to improve the
perspectives of the earth. Therefore, it is important to underline that the aim of this
book is not first and foremost to present a practical programme but instead is to
present theoretical and empirical research on various areas where (the normative)
ecosocial transition is already taking steps.
Transformative sciences and transformative research
Transformative research (TR) figures out the frame of reference that contextualizes
the research on the contributions of social work and social policy to ecosocial
transition also in this book. The definition of Transformative Research seems to
be biased and has changed during the last ten years. At the level of the higher

42. The conceptualization of ecosocial transition 19
policies of science, it has been used to describe any new paradigm, discovery or
innovative research that promises better competition and new fields of markets
from the perspective of neoliberal economic interests especially in the context of
the US National Science Foundation (NSF 2007: 1–2). In the similar context of
European programmes for research funding (European Commission 2015, ERC
2015), words like ‘through breaking’ or ‘frontier research’ are used.
However, nowadays transformative research can also be understood to
more exclusively describe the growing interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary
community of researchers around the globe that provide knowledge and seek
solutions for the urgent future challenges of humanity (Trevors et al. 2012,
University of Bolzano 2015, ISSC 2015). Trevors et al. (2012: 121) even argue
that one cannot claim to be doing transformative research if one is not aiming to
alleviate the tremendous personal, social, environmental and economic problems
that currently face humans.
Interdisciplinary research on transition towards sustainability has a number
of conceptual differences. Depending on the background of the authors and
their prioritized area of changes also the concepts of socio-technical and social–
ecological transition are used (Smith and Stirling 2010). The natural sciences
mainly speak about ecological transition and largely still focus on biophysical
dimensions giving only little attention to social dimensions. Ecosocial transition
is mainly used in social sciences and aims at integrating ecological and social
dimensions. Socio-ecological transition is also used in order to cover the
biophysical and social changes, however this concept mainly refers to macro-
level systemic processes (Rotmans and Fischer-Kowalski 2009, Fischer-Kowalski
et al. 2012). Further, sustainability transition or social–ecological transition are
also used broadly in the scientific literature (for example STRN 2010). Social–
ecological transition already implies that on Earth there are no pure ecological or
social systems that are not influenced by the others.
In criticizing sustainability research for being limited mainly to the natural
sciences, one has to keep in mind that also the social sciences have been mainly
focusing on the social aspects of sustainability (for example Magee et al. 2012).
Therefore, serious research efforts to combine the social, environmental and
economic dimensions of sustainability are needed.
Categories of ecosocial transition
While speaking about ecosocial (or socio-ecological) transition, two of its phases
are often differentiated in the respective literature (for example NEF 2015a,
Fisher-Kowalski et al. 2012). The ‘historical’ transition (comp. by Polanyi
1944, ‘Great Transformation’), has taken – or is still taking – place away from
the agrarian regime, which was based upon solar energy and land-use, towards
the industrial regime, which is based upon fossil fuels and a wide variety of
conversion technologies. Although this first transition is regarded as history in
Western industrial societies, it actually describes the present development in
many developing countries.

43. 20 Aila-Leena Matthies
The new transition moves away from fossil fuels towards solar and other low
carbon energy sources due to the limitations of fossil fuels. This is the phase that
may be actively accelerated to avoid catastrophic climate change. This transition
is either practised or becomes part of the political agenda mainly in Western
countries (for example the National Council for Ecological Transition of France
2015, Brown et al. 2015).
Also frequently referred to in the debate on ecosocial transition are the
different scenarios concerning the rate of how radical the changes ought to be in
applying the aims of sustainability in the practice of policies. In three
different perspectives are identified by combining the scenario analyses of the
cross-European research project by Fischer-Kowalski et al. (2012) and those of
Rob Hopkins (2008), who is one of the founders of the transition movement:
The three scenarios in clearly differentiate the current streams of
understanding and practising sustainability policies. It also highlights the necessity
of political decisions taking into account the linkages between the environmental,
economic and social challenges of societies. First, although many people would
like to see that politicians and other responsible decision-makers would keep
the current status of development and harmony in prospering societies, and
especially maintain the achieved privileges and level of consumption, it is clear
that ecological limits may prohibit this. Second, it is vital to acknowledge the
difference between ‘green-washing’– the type of reforms that maintain the status
quo with slightly ecological consumption – and the radical changes promoted by
Table 2.1 Scenarios of ecosocial transition (according to Hopkins 2008, Fischer-Kowalski
et al. 2012)
No policy change Conventional
environmentalism
The transition approach
Aims Defending status quo‘Greener’ growth by
market instruments
Smart, lean and fair
holistic societal change
in economic de-growth
Means and
tools
Business as usual Emission trading,
lobbying, ICT,
recycling
Eco-tax reform from
labour to resources, up-
cycling
Strategy Current level of
consumption and
production defended
Investments in green
production, green
consumer choice
and price policy
Less resource use by
changed policies of
food, work, mobility,
housing, welfare etc.
Norms Partial application of
existing sustainability
policies
Correct price
seeking, carbon
footprint
Global justice, holistic
wellbeing, resilience
indicators
Actions No effective control
measurements
Individual choice Collective, community-
based participation,
‘global’ actions
UnattendedGlobal megatrends,
preparing changes
Rebound effects,
global distribution
Preconditions of
transition

44. The conceptualization of ecosocial transition 21
the ecosocial transition approach. Don Clifton (2010) compares the reformistic
and transformative approaches in their capacity to achieve sustainability and states
that the transformative one is seemingly more the way towards socio-ecological
resilience.
Especially when regarding the scenarios from the point of view of social
work and social policy, it becomes clear that as part of contemporary society
these institutions are also standing at the crossroads between exactly the same
scenarios. It sounds no more sustainable to continue mainstream social work and
social policy, with the current managerialistic and individualistic orientation,
without considering their social, ecological and economic consequences. Some
superficial forms of ‘conventional environmentalism’, such as adding ecological
consumerism or participatory experiments in social services, are not helpful
enough to contribute to ecosocial transition. The radical transition approach
indicates rather the deep interdependence between the exploitation of nature and
increasing social injustice. It also seeks to practice new types of alternative social
work and social policy; ones which do not demand economic growth as their
financial guarantee but some other comprehensive understanding of wellbeing
and justice.
The manifestations of ecosocial transition
Manifestation in sciences
The considerations of Bruno Latour (2005) on the domain of ‘the science of the
social’ underline that ‘the social’ is not just something that can be attributed to
other domains such as technology, economy or environment as if these exist
outside of society; they all are acting in, shaped by and influencing society. And
the way in which they interact in society belong to the focus area of the social
sciences, too. So far, the contribution of social sciences to the ecosocial transition
of societies cannot be limited only to some additional social dimensions. The
International Social Science Council (ISSC 2015) is pushing the importance of
social sciences in the research of global challenges for a number of reasons. In
the ISSC report Transformative Cornerstones of Social Science Research for
Global Change, Heide Hackmann and Asunción Lera St. Clair (2012) argue that
the definitions of research priorities and concrete agendas are already political
decision processes where societies, including various stakeholders, have to
be involved. The research priorities cannot be isolated to the challenge of one
discipline only, but instead they are shared challenges to which the solutions
demand joint efforts from both natural and social scientists as well as the human,
medical and engineering sciences (Hackmann and St.Clare 2012: 15). They invite
social scientists to research what the processes of change are in particular places
where social and environmental problems converge. Further, social scientists
can provide knowledge about what changes at the individual, organizational,
cultural and systemic levels are needed for sustainability and how these future
challenges can be anticipated in socially acceptable and adequate ways. The

45. 22 Aila-Leena Matthies
authors nominate the following ‘transformative cornerstones of social sciences’,
that is the knowledge of social sciences which needs to be integrated into research
on global changes:
• Historical and contextual complexities of the phenomenon / challenge / crisis
• Consequences
• Conditions and visions for change
• Interpretation and subjective sense-making
• Responsibilities
• Governance and decision-making.
The main point concerning the role of social sciences in ecosocial transition
is that environmental issues and the challenge of sustainability are basically
contextualized and determined both politically and societally. Hence, they
cannot be insulated to one field of science. The above-mentioned dimensions
of knowledge concerning current and future challenges at both the local and
global level can be communicated by social sciences at an interdisciplinary round
table. They are actually relevant research topics of ecosocial transition from the
standpoint of social work, too. When considering the intersection of social and
ecological problems, social work as a discipline and profession is involved in the
contextualization of the problems, the prevention of any consequences due to the
problems and the individual and community-based interpretation of the problems
as well as taking responsibility for the practical solutions to them. Social work
also increasingly intervenes in the governance and decision-making processes
of ecosocial challenges especially by providing knowledge from the grass-roots
level of the problems (Närhi and Matthies 2016). One can even apply the above-
mentioned cornerstones as an analytical frame for questions with regard to any
social and ecological problem that is to be researched and intervened by social
work, such as those discussed in this book.
The transformative research discussed above is the best example of the
manifestation of ecosocial transition in different scientific efforts (STRN 2010).
Practically all disciplines and areas of research have started to develop their
own research reflecting the demands of knowledge related to transition towards
sustainability. But it is especially the interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary
approach that seems best to promote a scientific proactive response to the global
megatrends threatening the wellbeing of humans and the flora and fauna. Studying
only one scientific area is no longer prioritized, but each discipline still needs to
identify its own potential to contribute to the sustainability of the Earth. This is
what we aim to do with this book in the case of social work and social policy.
Another significant characterization of ecosocial research is its international
and even global approach: one of the core scientific arguments of sustainability
moves the attention to the interconnection between local processes and global
impacts, be it climate change, the mining industry, food production, environmental
disasters or the forced migration of people. The scientific research, however, is
not only focusing on the global interconnection of the environmental, economic

46. The conceptualization of ecosocial transition 23
and social crises but also on their global and local solutions. Scientific experts
provide scenarios and expectant knowledge concerning the short- and long-term
futures that are dependent on the decisions and actions taken today. Therefore,
scientific research and debate produces knowledge that is the main tool used in the
two further forms of transition, the transition policies and the citizens’ movements
towards more sustainable solutions. Consequently, questions about global social
impacts may also be appropriate for social work research and practice.
Although the topical areas of environmental or green social work (Dominelli
2012, Gray et al. 2012, McKinnon and Alston 2016) and the ecosocial approach in
social work and social policy (Närhi and Matthies 2016, Peeters 2012a) are broad,
the potential research-based contributions of social work and social policy for the
interdisciplinary knowledge base of ecosocial transition has not been systematized,
especially in regard to its global networking. However, instruments like the Social
Impact Assessment (Närhi 2004), which is based on social work research, or the
theory development of sustainable wellbeing and welfare (Hirvilammi 2015,
Fitzpatrick and Caldwell 2001) are highly relevant examples of social work and
social policy research that provide a holistic and cross-disciplinary understanding
of ecosocial transition. Also, scientific approaches applying methods of action
research and social learning are crucial as they directly bridge the gap between
practice development and research (for example Wals 2007, Peeters 2012b,
Matthies et al. 2000, Matthies et al. 2011).
Manifestations in policy-making
Different manifested forms of ecosocial transitions can be identified as part of
policy-making processes in a multi-level setting. As outlined by Hopkins (2008:
75) there is a certain division of tasks between global, national and local level of
policy-making in promoting ecosocial transition towards sustainability. Each of
the levels has indeed significant instruments to link this process, such as:
• global summits, agreements, emission quotas and global watch
• national legislation, taxation strategies and action plans
• local community programmes, infrastructure initiatives, Fair Trade
municipalities and agendas (ibid.).
However, as Hopkins states, transition initiatives mostly function best if
a combination of top-down and bottom-up responses appear. The global and
international level of political potential for ecosocial transition is embedded in
the capacity to establish overall binding standards and programmes from the
highest level of the mutual commitment of collaborative societies. Examples of
these are the very first United Nations World Commission on Environment and
Development (UN 1987), better known as the Brundtland Commission, and the
subsequent international agreements and communications that address protection
of the environment and the promotion of sustainable development. Later, these
have been followed by the world climate summits and climate change protocols.

47. 24 Aila-Leena Matthies
Also the European level of political activities towards sustainability incorporate
significant potentials: the European Union as well as the European Council
provide various intensive instruments to reinforce ecosocial transition in the
member states, although the main agenda of the EU is rather to promote economic
growth and trade, which is a contradiction from the point of view of sustainability.
The European Union has an even stronger position and more rigorous legal
instruments to underpin the protection of the climate, water, forests and socio-
cultural environment among their member states than any global organization.
However, the central remaining question is whether all these political agendas
and commitments are meant to be taken seriously as their impact on positive
ecological changes has been very weak.
The Global Agenda of Social Work and Social Development (IFSW, IASSW
and ICSW 2012) may be regarded as evidence of global policy-making towards
ecosocial transition as well. The international organizations of schools social work
(IASSW), social workers (IFSW) and social welfare organizations (ICSW) state
how the current development has unequal consequences for global, national and
local communities and negative impacts on people. The organizations especially
recognize that ‘people’s health and wellbeing suffer as a result of equalities and
unsustainable environments related to climate change, pollutants, war, natural
disasters and violence to which there are inadequate international responses’
(ibid.: 1).
International efforts to carry out the ecosocial transition of societies have
evidently rather a top-down character, and their resolutions are thought to be
followed by the national level of actors, who are also requested to report back
to the EU and global organizations about their progress in regard to the issues
under concern. Similarly, the national level of agencies can have a strong top-
down impact on promoting ecosocial transition through legislation and financial
programmes to influence local level governance. National policy-making, besides
international agencies, also plays a central role in regulating the market actors
and consumption, the use of natural resources and the production of food. And
so far national policies are in a strong position to outline ecosocial transition –
or its absence. The political activities and macro-level efforts may sound huge,
but they mainly remain in the category of conventional environmentalism (Table
2.1). The contradictions between economic and environmental interest demarcate
the conflict lines in political decision-making, but the awareness about the
social consequences and impacts of the policies are often completely missing.
The question remains as to when the social consequences will be recognized as
strong enough to enforce more radical changes, which would then be a bottom-up
transition.
The local level of policy-making and acting and the local communities are
the main platform for realizing the practical steps of ecosocial transition towards
sustainability. According to Hopkins (2008), the local level of policies not only
applies to national decisions and regulations but at best also acts from the bottom-
up and influences the larger dimensions of society. Most of the transition initiatives
indeed emerge as local actions and not as macro-level political programmes. In

48. The conceptualization of ecosocial transition 25
this regard, Hopkins (ibid.: 75–76) mentions locally and regionally owned energy
plants and agriculture companies, community economy and climate-friendly local
communities.
The Agenda 21 programme (UNCED 1992) which started as a consequence of
the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 has been a core document and frame
of reference for efforts of sustainable social work and social policy at a local level.
It was perhaps the first time at this kind of prominent forum that dimensions of
social welfare were combined on the same agenda with the environmental and
economic challenges of the earth. Agenda 21 emphasized the local level of action
towards sustainability while addressing poverty, consumption patterns and the
sustainability of human settlements in combination with the management of natural
resources as well as the issue of democracy and equality from the perspective
of the most disadvantaged groups. The process of Local Agenda 21 mobilized
numerous projects with the shared goal to bring together the main social actors
for joint cooperative efforts on vital issues of environment and development.
This has been both a top-down and bottom-up process across the globe. In a
research project that followed up the Agenda 21 process in Europe (Lafferty
and Eckerberg 1998), the authors state that although the research addressed the
national configurations of an international policy implication, numerous unique
local cases of peoples’ actions for sustainability also emerged. Local NGOs and
also municipal authorities, service providers and institutions were mostly the core
participants carrying the responsibility for sustainable local living conditions.
In order not to contrast the local and global levels unnecessary, it is important
to keep in mind the numerous international social and economic movements
that are bridging local and global efforts, also in social work and social policy.
Further, there are several European initiatives, such as the Covenant of Mayors
that focuses on the climate efforts of cities that bridge the local and the European
level. Finally, also the regional level of policies is significant.
Manifestations in practical movements
Ecosocial transition manifests itself, however, mainly through the hands of various
social movements – actually there are joint efforts of numerous movements of
ecosocial transition that also feed the policy actions with initiatives and critical
partnership in many countries. These movements apply the slogan ‘Act locally, think
globally’ since these actions mainly take place in local contexts, but the awareness
of the global dimensions of the issue as well as global networking are often self-
evident. Since the first ecological crisis in the early 1970s various local and even
global social movements have emerged that promote in one way or another, a
change in society or in its direct environment towards sustainability. There are also
numerous forms of networking, groups and activities focused on conversation that
are based on ecosocial transition. For example, the New Economics Foundation
(NEF 2015b and c) in London – that also includes scientific activism – claims
to be ‘promoting innovative solutions that challenge the mainstream thinking
on environmental, economic and social issues’ (also Resilience Alliance, Great

49. 26 Aila-Leena Matthies
Transition Initiative, PP Foundation, Commons Transition and several national
level think tanks). There exists also an online-based forum called Global Alliance
for a Deep-Ecological Social Work, established by Fred Besthorn (2015) that
directly addresses the ecosocial approach in social work. It aims to bring together
social workers caring for the environment. There is a huge diversity of issue-
based movements and action groups that address some very practical dimensions
such as protecting the natural environment, strengthening the social environment
or practising new models of a sustainable lifestyle.
One of the most visible and systematically organized movements is the
Transition movement (Hopkins 2008), which is connected with Transitions
Towns and Transition Network. UK-based Rob Hopkins, who is the founder of
the Transition movement (Heinberg 2008), connects the core of transition to the
issue of energy and the transit from peak oil to renewable and local systems of
energy. But also several other issues are addressed, in particular permaculture and
self-sufficient livelihood as food production especially in a sustainable way in
local communities is significant for transition.
The Transition Handbook (Hopkins 2008) includes a rich collection of cases
for local initiatives of transition, and the national level is made responsible for
transition through legislative and political means. Further, international agencies
are expected to maintain strong international climate change protocols and a
moratorium on biodiesel production as a consequence of rethinking economic
growth and biodiversity protection (ibid.: 75).
Hence, on the one side, the Transition Movement using this name has been
emerging mainly in the English-speaking Western countries and is now spreading
across the European continent often by growing from the roots of previous
environmental and green movements. Transition towns and network can be
followed up and joined especially by social media on the internet (although use
of social media in movements has also been criticized for leading to inaction).
On the other side, social movements that have been developing transformative
ecosocial alternatives, even if not calling themselves transition movements, can
be especially found among indigenous communities in Latin America, Asia and
Africa. As Michael Löwy (2014: 14) argues, this is not only because local and
national environmental struggles between petroleum and mining multinationals
and actions defending rivers and forests are taking place in the living areas of
indigenous people, but indigenous communities are also those who propose
realistic alternatives and more sustainable ways of life when compared to those of
neoliberal globalized capitalism. For instance, the ‘Buen vivir’ social philosophy
is not only inspiring movements in South America, but even to the Ecuadorian
constitution, which refers to it as following: ‘We ... hereby decide to build a new
form of public coexistence, in diversity and in harmony with nature, to achieve
the good way of living.’ (The Guardian 2013). In particular, Eduardo Gudynas
from Uruguay, a leading scholar on buen vivir, criticizes the Western concept
of wellbeing for only referring to individuals and neglecting the social context
of their community in a unique environmental situation (Gudynas 2011; also
Chapter 3 in this book).

50. The conceptualization of ecosocial transition 27
The social in the ecosocial transition
Since the aim of our book is to identify what is and could be the contribution
of social work and social policy, it is vital also to investigate how ‘the social’
is understood in the transition debate, as well as in the entirety of sustainability
research. Conventionally, social dimensions are indeed mentioned as the third core
area of development that needs to be promoted in balance with the economic and
ecological dimension (Peeters 2012a). In order to be sustainable it is not enough to
reduce the exploitation of the natural resources of the earth in the economy and to
take better care of the biophysical environment; it also demands a significant change
in various dimensions of society. Although the three-fold concept of sustainability
has existed already for decades, the special expertise and content of social
sustainability has essentially not been deepened, but seems mostly to appear as an
addition to the economy and the environment. Especially in systems-theoretical
frameworks of research on sustainability, ‘the social component’ focuses on public
perception, stakeholder participation and their influence on decision-making
and serves in facilitating the acceptance of science and technology (for example
Hopkins et al. 2012). Usually macro-level socio-economic quantitative aspects
such as economic equality, health, fighting poverty and women’s access to income,
as well as education and further service availability are regarded as vital social
factors of transition towards sustainability (Dillard et al. 2009, Borström 2012).
Also the involvement of local communities, democratization and care for the most
vulnerable groups are revealed (Magee et al. 2012). These are indeed elementary
subjects to be addressed; however, these typical criteria for social sustainability
are actually just characteristics of a fictive good society. Certain questions, such
as who is capable of fulfilling these criteria in society and how they should be
achieved have not been topical. Further, the interlinkages between the aspects of
social sustainability and environmental issues have not been deeply analyzed. In a
similar manner, Lena Soots and Michel Gosmondi (2008) criticize that the question
of sustainability ‘has attracted much meta-level analysis that offers little analysis of
the transition to sustainability question or, when it does, moves quickly to global
change or local action’ (ibid.). The authors rather wish to respond to the need for
middle-level analysis of organizations and argue that the social economy type of
organizations are better operationalized towards regulating ecological resources,
reinstating democracy and reclaiming sustainable futures.
So far the transformative contribution of social work and social policy towards
a socially and ecologically and economically sustainable society as well as to
resilient communities has not yet been discovered at large. Basically, it can be
seen that both policy-makers and civil society are those who are legitimated to
strengthen social sustainability. But such scientifically and practically established
professional instances like social work and social policy should also be involved
and take a stronger role in ecosocial transition. The issues of social sustainability
undeniably belong to social political tasks and those of social work, like fighting
poverty, enabling equality and democratic participation and caring for vulnerable
people as well.

51. 28 Aila-Leena Matthies
However, what is significant and what we would like to discuss with this
book is that their contribution is not limited to the conventional ‘social issues’
only, but specifically to the interlinkages between the environment and the social
as well as the economic and the social. If ecosocial transition is wanted in the
society, the core point is to identify the deep social nature and impact of any
environmental and economic project or crisis. None of the economic transactions,
environmental interventions, industrial and agricultural investments or land use
programmes take place in a societal vacuum. And none of them are without strong
social consequences, which have to be anticipated, reduced and solved among
the people facing the consequences and having their own role as stakeholders.
Therefore, the absence of social policy and social work, as research, professional
practice and activism, in the debate on sustainability is simply unacceptable and
unjustified. With all of their experience in regard to the suffering and wellbeing
of people, knowledge about social security and social cohesion, capacities in
community-building and the mobilization of social capital as well as the risks
of social conflicts and marginalization, social policy and social work should
themselves take self-confidently and responsibly their roles on the forefront of
ecosocial transition together with other agencies. It is true that mainstream social
policy and social work would like to focus on their conventional and institutionally
limited repertoire of tasks. But in reality the increasing environmental, economic
and social crises are unable to be solved separately or left outside the doors of
welfare agencies.
The point is not only about understanding the potential positive contribution
and role of social work in ecosocial transition, but it is also necessary to overcome
the uncritical self-understanding as a helping profession. Due to this self-image,
social work and social policy have for long enough neglected the fact that they
too are also part of the ecosocial problem of the globe, especially while being
dependent on, and committed to, constant economic growth. Therefore, the concept
of ecosocial transition implies that also ‘the social’, that is the society, including its
institutions of social work and social policy, needs a deep transformative process
to enable a sustainable future perspective. They also need further involvement
of those actors with a social work and social policy background, together with
civil society and policy-makers. In , the different links are illustrated of
social work and social policy to the three dimensions of ecosocial transition that
are discussed in this book.
In this book, as also shown in , we therefore aim to deepen not only
the social aspects of sustainability but to focus on the question of what kind of
social work and social policy is best to replace the current model, which causes
economic and ecological catastrophes, in order to support a more hopeful, yet
more complicated, future.
One option to conceptualize ecologically sustainable social work is to start
by looking at how ecological disasters have already caused social problems and
threatened the social wellbeing of people and their communities. These can lead
to the development of reactive and corrective social interventions. This includes
also direct interventions of social work and social policy in environmentally

52. The conceptualization of ecosocial transition 29

















ENVIRONMEN TAL
TRANSITION
New holistic wellbeing
SW as part of nature
Interventions in
ecological crises and
conflicts
Food security
Living environment
Housing, energy
Nature-assisted SW
ECONOMIC
TRANSITION
New holistic wellbeing
De-growth
Equality of resources
Low consumption
Community economy
Commons
New subsistence
SOCIAL TRANSITION
New holistic wellbeing
Life style and subsistence
Urban/rural community
work
Most vulnerable groups
Equality
Participation
Democracy
SOCIAL
WORK/
SOCIAL
POLICY
Figure 2.1 Contribution of social work and social policy to ecosocial transition
caused crises (food, housing, protection of the most vulnerable people; Peeters
2012a, Dominelli 2012).
The second option is to explore which types of social work and social policy
are directly connected to reductions in the use of biophysical natural resources
and withdraw from the conventional model of economic growth. For instance, the
protection of nature and the reduction of climate change can go hand in hand with
the protection of local services and a holistic understanding about the significance
of the environment for welfare. These range from social political reforms of income
and understanding the security of subsistence and livelihood to employment and
community, recycling- and upcycling-based new employment and community work
protecting nature in the living environment. Finally, there have already emerged
ecosocial contributions by interventions that directly demonstrate the value of
nature as such, and that connect human wellbeing back with nature; for instance in
projects involving nature- and animal-assisted social work.
For social work the consequent community-orientation, the comprehensive
understanding of wellbeing and its direct connections to livelihood are relevant,
and at the same time challenge a paradigmatic change. On the other hand,
one cannot avoid the impression of a certain romanticizing of the original
poor communities and the middle-class-based development of the Transition
Movement. Also the identified reality of superdiversity of societies (Vandenabeele

53. 30 Aila-Leena Matthies
et al. forthcoming) enforces the change of the traditional understanding of
communities. Social aspects of community have been overlooked as have social
policy and social services. Ecosocial transition can also mean a change in the
understanding of professions and institutions. Transition Towns are developing
especially the economic structures, the mobility and the built environment
towards resilience, but there is no reason not to also re-think social services
and social security. However, the comprehensive infrastructure of wellbeing
could not be included in the areas targeted by transition. For social work also
the way in which the processes of transition are expected to run is central: will
they be bottom-up, inclusive, participatory and cross-generational and respect
social diversity? These belong also to the normative and ethical codes of social
work, too.
Conclusions: towards new understating of social work as ecosocial
work
As analyzed by Tuuli Hirvilammi and Tuula Helne (2014), in the sustainability
debate there is a common line of argumentation: the essential demand of a paradigm
shift that is even comparable with scientific revolutions. Tony Fitzpatrick and
Caron Caldwell (2001) speak about a new radical theory of ecosocial welfare.
Jef Peeters (2012a: 290), while defining the new paradigm that is embedded
in the ecosocial transition, considers the following conditions essential for
sustainability: the reduction of the input and throughput of natural resources, the
fair redistribution of wealth and energy as well as a new vision for the wellbeing
of humans and the planet. Thus the needed transition is not just one for better care
for the biophysical environment but for the quality of society, too.
In order to conclude this conceptual debate, it is significant to reflect upon
whether ecosocial transition opens a new perspective for social work and social
policy as an alternative to the dominant and destructive social and ecological
development of societies. We are currently witnessing the long and slow
death of the current welfare state, its social services and the systems of social
security, which are withering away due to decades of unavoidable mainstream
development, even in the Nordic countries. In the meantime neoliberalism is still
alive although nobody calls himself a protagonist of it (Crouch 2011). Analogous
to the categorization of the two phases of ecological transition, the first historical
transition in the development of the welfare state and its institutions can be seen
in the reformistic birth of social policy, social security and the social professions.
They have been helpful for configuring the brutality of industrial society and the
market economy into a socially acceptable and civilized modus. The price paid
has been that both social work and social policy have been established in a deep
interdependence with industrial capitalism, too.
The second transition, the new ecosocial transition of social policy and social
work as agencies of the welfare state, should then surely mean something else
than just a neoliberal fading of any sociopolitical infrastructure. Seeking the new
paradigmatic change of social work and social policy in the sense of ecosocial

54. The conceptualization of ecosocial transition 31
transition means that also a radically new understanding about these institutions
is necessary. Therefore, the conventional concepts of social work as a profession
as well as the areas of social policy are already challenged in the discussion and in
this book. Now they are requested to take distance from the models of economic
growth that are causing natural disasters. It may mean that the institutions and
professional standards of social work as well as its scientific research and training
need to be transformed, and that social work has to seek new allies and a new
basis for working. In many developing countries we can already identify another
type of understanding of social work; one that is more political and more directly
active in environmental issues.
Although numerous frustrated social workers are claiming that the current
managerially controlled and individualized–processed routines in their jobs do not
allow for the maintaining of ‘real social work’, at the same time these structures
still offer a certain security and escapism. As such, another future is still very
open. However, it seems obvious that social work and social policy are needed
in the ecosocial transition, too, and more so in a large spectrum of activities:
those connected to environmental issues and conflicts, human rights, food policy,
urban planning and rural development, growing cooperation with civil society,
citizens’ movements, media and interdisciplinary settings (Dominelli 2012, Närhi
and Matthies 2016). Consequently, social work has its burden and chance to find
and define its new ecosocial agency – as ecosocial work. ‘Real social work’ as
ecosocial work takes place with the people themselves in their own environment,
including all the issues concerned with material and cultural wellbeing. In the
case that food security, housing, mobility, health, climate change and subsistence
are becoming part of social work agency and research, the profession and the
movement, then real social work may be rediscovered. With this book we would
like to invite readers to become part of the eocosocial transition by starting to
reflect upon the following questions:
• What are the mechanisms of current welfare policies and their economic
basis that cause exploitation of nature and what kind of alternative economic
models for social wellbeing are possible?
• What are the causalities between social crises and environmental crises, and
what kind of release and support can social work provide?
• How can social work and social policy overcome their dependence on growth
and their agenda committed to labour-focused life, consumeristic models of
services and individualized material indicators or wellbeing?
• How can social work interventions shift from technological–medical–
managerial approaches towards more ‘natural’ and holistic forms of (self-)
help, empowerment, resource-orientation and prevention?
• What are the practical dimensions of the living environment that are essential
for holistic wellbeing and daily coping especially in regard to vulnerable
groups (traffic, housing, recreation)?
• What kind of sustainable models of mobility, settlements and food production
can be supported by social work and welfare policies?

55. Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:

56. WHO PROFITS BY
THE INCREASE OF
WEALTH?
PROFITS OF
NATURAL
MONOPOLIES.
demand for labor has proportionately decreased. And, consequently,
the wages in general must have fallen according to the fundamental
principles of economics, because of the increase of population
without property and without resources.
Now then, if the incomes of, say, 40-millions of individuals in the
gainful pursuits, have on the whole been reduced; and all these
millions of people have been made worse off,
we have the right to ask: Who was profited by
the phenomenal increase of wealth during the
period of the seven years? In other words:
Who had obtained the amount of $21,787,908,803 worth, the
increase of wealth up to 1897? Is it the group of tenants, or the
group of mortgagors? or is it the group of owners of free farms and
homes worth $5,000 and under, as they are represented in the 2d R.
table, p. 47? And was it possible for all these highly productive
families to retain a goodly share of this phenomenal increase of the
wealth?
The above total of the increased wealth, divided by the 7 years,
gives, on the average, an increase of $3,112,558,400 every year. It
being, of course, understood that this average was smaller in the
year 1891, and augmenting year by year, it became largest in the
year 1897. And this augmenting necessitates a progressive increase
in the business of all monopolies, trusts and combinations, highly
increasing the gross and the net incomes of all.
THE TOTAL ITEMS OF THE CONCENTRATION
OF WEALTH.
Let us then sum up the net earnings of the natural monopolies
alone, as they are given on p. 101, leaving out their necessary
increase consequent upon the unavoidable
growth of business in their favor during the
seven years. The net earnings of $563,689,333
by these monopolies in every year amount to
$3,945,825,331 worth of wealth in seven years. This is one item of

57. PROFITS OF
MORTGAGEE
MONOPOLIES.
MONOPOLIZERS OF
RENTABLE HOMES.
positive loss by tens of millions of the people in favor of a few
families, connected with the monopolies.
Another item of similar earnings, we have seen on pp. 125, 126,
consists of the annual interest charge, equal to $539,352,898, from
the results of labor of the mortgagor families,
who are compelled to lose this amount of their
substance yearly in consequence of the
abnormal distribution of wealth in general. And,
as there is no reason to suppose that mortgages were not increasing
in their numbers, and the mortgagor families were not losing their
properties by foreclosure, so there is no reason whatever to suppose
that the above annual interest charge against mortgages, on the
whole, had diminished up to 1897. Hence, we consider that the
above annual interest charge continued to be paid at least as it was
paid in 1890. For, in order to diminish it or to stop its ruinous effects,
some important reform must be accomplished, which, however, has
not been done.
The annual interest charge of $539,352,898, against the private
family-mortgages, in seven years amounts to $3,775,470,286 worth
of wealth or of the products of the mortgagor families, lost during
the period in favor of group 4 of the 2d table (p. 45 or 47). This
amount is in addition to “the net earnings of $3,945,825,331, which
accrued to the same group of families in the table.
Further, we have seen in the lower table, p. 116, that there were
4,999,396 families that hire their homes, because being homeless.
And this number of the homeless must be
augmented by 246,938 families, found in the
group of the “tenants of farms and homes,”
which are represented by the author of the
same 2d table to be so many more than the lower and upper tables,
p. 116, contain of the tenant families. We have therefore to deal
with 5,246,334 families that hire their homes
[122]
mainly in the 448
cities and towns we have spoken about on pp. 81, 114-15, 132. For
it is they that find shelter in the rentable houses of these cities,

58. PER FAMILY HOUSE
RENT.
MONOPOLIES OF
RENTABLE LANDS.
towns, etc., by paying rents. And our problem is to find the amount
of rent they paid to the owners of these houses.
An example of average monthly rentals may here be presented for
Boston, as follows:
Monthly rentals under $5average $4
From $5 to $10 average 8
From $10 to $15 average12½
From $15 to $20 average16⅔
From $20 to $25 average22
[123]
These averages may be too small for many cities and too large for
the whole United States. But if we take the general average for all
families at $9.50 a month, it will probably be
little below,
[124]
but cannot be above the true
one. In fact, if every family of 4.93 members
paid an average of $9.50 of monthly rent, it
would indicate only the net income in favor of the owners of the
rentable houses, and absolute losses on the side of the homeless.
Now then, by paying $9.50 a month each, the 5,246,334 homeless
families paid $598,082,076 rent in one year. And by paying the same
amount seven years, without regarding the increase of families, they
paid $4,186,574,532 worth of their energy, as an unavoidable tribute
to those that speculate in their comfortable beds, while performing
every action by the hired labor of agents and building new houses
by hired laborers.
Furthermore, we have seen in the upper table, p. 116, that there
were other 1,624,765 families that hire their farms, because being
landless.
If we regard the average tenements of these families at 136 acres
of land per family,
[125]
we shall find that the
1,624,765 tenant families held about
220,968,040 acres of land every year. Although

59. THE PROFITS OF
LAND MONOPOLIES.
HOUSE RENT ON
FARMS.
this general average for all farmers in the United States may be a
little too small for the tenant families, because their acreage
increases much more rapidly than that of the families owning their
farms, as we shall soon see, yet we shall consider this average as it
is given.
As to the average rent per acre of the farming land for the United
States, the general average was $2.81 for wheat and $3.03 for corn
raising lands.
[126]
Supposing, however, that many farm tenants hold the grazing and
other less valued lands, let us even admit that the general average
rent per acre was only $2.75 for all lands hired by these tenants.
By paying then $2.75 of rent per acre, the 1,624,765 tenant
families paid $607,662,110 in one year for the 220,968,040 acres of
land that does not belong to them. And by
paying the same amount seven years—from
1891 to 1897 inclusive—they paid
$4,253,634,770 worth of wealth to a number of
the speculators upon land and upon the energy of the farmers who
are the slaves of dividogenesure. It follows that every farming family
of this group, on the average, paid about $374 for the land alone.
It seems, however, that there are many farm tenants that pay
separate rents for the farm houses. And in the year 1890 these paid
the total of $140,000,000 of the house rent,
says Dr. C. B. Spahr.
[127]
By paying this rent
seven years they paid an additional amount of
$980,000,000 worth of their crystallized
energy. Including this total into the general total of house rents, let
us now sum up the above losses of the productive people, which are
the gains of the few monopolists and speculators for the seven years
as follows in the 1st table of concentration of wealth on the next
page:

60. 1st Table of Concentration of Wealth.
Monopolies and Combinations. Total Net Incomes.
The natural monopolies
[128]
$ 3,945,825,331
Mortgagee monopolies
[128]
3,775,470,286
Companies, etc. of rentable houses 5,166,574,532
Monopolies of rentable lands 4,253,634,770
Grand total $17,141,504,919
Even this grand total indicates that a nation of thirty millions of
individuals would be rich by it, yet it does not include many other
net incomes.
Besides these certain facts, the highest rentals derived from the
offices, hotels, and other rentable properties found in the central
parts of the cities above and below 100,000 population are to be
ascertained. And no one will doubt that the comparatively very few
owners of these city-centers must have collectively drawn a greater
amount of the net incomes from rent, than can be expressed by
three billion dollars’ worth of wealth, derived without work by the
few owners of the most valuable parts, especially of the 28 cities far
above 100,000 population.
Further, we have not treated the net earnings of the companies
and combinations filling up the large storehouses of the wholesale
and retail business in the same great cities, which distribute the
industrial products of the people, for consumption at home and
abroad. And while the distribution of these products is carried on by
cheap laborers, we have not represented here the few monopolists
that grow into multi-millionaires behind the busy work of the
distribution. The net incomes of these will be included into the
incomes of the Manufacture and Mechanical Trades hereafter.
But further still, we entirely omit the indication of the net earnings
of “the meat companies” in the large cities, like those of the Chicago
stockyards, “the cattle companies, uniting more than $100,000,000;

61. THE TRUSTS’ NET
INCOMES OMITTED.
OWNERS OF THE
CENTRAL PARTS OF
THE CITIES.
combinations of the millions, invested in the
elevators of the Northwest against the wheat-
growers; in whiskey and beer about
$100,000,000; in sugar, $75,000,000; in
leather over $100,000,000 (1894). The trust of piano-makers was to
have a capital of $50,000,000, and there is the Cordage Trust that
gets from 40 to 50 per cent on its capital; the Cotton Seed Oil Trust
and Lard Trust” and others.
[129]
Finally, we have not treated the earnings of some other well-known
monopolies, trusts and combinations, which have, as all the others,
been established with no other purpose or end in view than to draw
from the productive people all they can for themselves by means of
speculation. For, drawing wealth by combined speculation is the
easiest thing in the world for those who were enabled to make its
beginning.
Omitting the above trusts and combinations, because of the
uncertainty of their net earnings, we have positive means to find out
the highest rentals of all central parts of the
cities and towns spoken of before. In
estimating the total income of the nation for
the year 1890, Dr. Spahr found that “the total
income from house and office rents, as estimated in the text” (his
text) “is one-seventh of the total income of the non-agricultural
population.”
[130]
And the total income of the latter population was
$8,200,000,000,
[131]
one-seventh of which is equal to
$1,171,428,571 3-7—apart from the agricultural land rents. This
one-seventh, then, paid seven times in seven years, amounted to
the same $8,200,000,000, which amount shows that the owners of
the central parts of the cities and towns obtained at least
$3,033,425,468 rent from their properties.
It does not, however, make a difference whether we accept the
whole amount of rent estimated by Dr. Spahr or simply add the three
billions and over to our grand total, p. 150. In any way, these facts
indicate that the wealth has concentrated with the very families that

62. CONCENTRATION OF
WEALTH IN HIGHER
SPHERES.
TRUSTS IN
INDUSTRIES.
were enormously wealthy in 1890 and appeared to be much
wealthier in 1897.
Yet the concentration of wealth is not only very rapid in drawing
the wealth of all the 11,190,152 families worth $5,000 and under
[132]
to a very few families of the 4th group in the
2d table,
[133]
but it is also rapid among the
families worth $5,000 and over,
[134]
so that all
are crushed by the monopolies, the trusts and
combinations. In order to illustrate it, I here quote the same
authority that estimated the increase of the wealth from 1890 to
1897 before making a conclusion from the foregoing, respecting
industries, as follows:
“As to development of ‘the’ trusts before 1890,” Mr. G. B. Waldron
says:
“Of the manufacturing and mechanical industries, whose statistics
were returned in the census of 1890, there are
43 whose manufactured product for the year
1889 was about $30,000,000, whose capital
averaged above $10,000 per establishment,
and which admitted of comparison with the census of 1880. Of these
43 industries we have chosen 30 as especially illustrating the
growing concentration of capital during the 10 years from 1880 to
1890.
“It is a significant fact that while in 1880 these industries were
carried on by 84,708 establishments, or about 33 per cent of the
total number of manufacturing establishments of the country, the
same industries in 1890 were carried on by only 69,659
establishments, or about 22 per cent of the total establishments,
and fewer in number by over 15,000 than in 1880.
“The value of the total product of these 30 industries in 1880 was
$3,125,915,574, or 58 per cent of the total manufacturing products
of the country. In 1890 these same industries produced products to

63. the value of $4,595,804,626, or about 51 per cent of the total
product.
“The concentration of capital in these 30 industries is shown from
the fact that in 1880 their total capital was $1,735,577,540, or an
average of $20,489 per establishment, while in 1890 their total
capital reached $3,468,277,249, or $49,789 per establishment, a
gain of 143 per cent in 10 years. There has been a similar
concentration of employees in these industries. In 1880 the 84,708
establishments used 1,340,490 employees, or an average of 16 to
an establishment. In 1890 there were 1,964,232 employees in these
industries, or an average of 28 to an establishment.”
[135]
This is a separate and an additional item of the concentration of
wealth which undoubtedly continued—from 1890 to 1897—to farther
aggravate the general situation, shown by the grand total of the net
incomes in favor of monopolies, on p. 150, beside the uncertain
ones.
For the 30 different industries, taken out of the 43, have perhaps
forever supplanted 15,049 factories and other establishments in ten
years. During the same time the supplanters did much more than
double their own capital. In fact the increase in the capital of these
supplanters reached the amount of $1,732,699,709 over the capital
they had in 1880.
But, if Mr. Waldron would investigate the same facts in the total
number of industries, he could probably show us that the
supplanting of different establishments reached at least 21,586, and
that the increase of capital reached over two billion dollars’ worth
with the fewer supplanters. That is, if the above rate of
concentration of the capital were the same, as it must have been,
throughout the industrial operations in the entire country.
And while there was also the concentration of the employees, we
know that, with the astonishing increase of the capital in favor of the
supplanting trusts, the wages of these employees have fallen,
[136]

64. SPECIAL LOSSES OF
THE WAGE-
EARNERS.
notwithstanding that their highly productive labor enormously
increased the capital of the fewer employers.
As regards the fall of wages in all the manufacturing industries
since 1890, it will not be out of place to state here the minimum
injury thereby sustained by the employees in the seven years under
our consideration.
When all the available data of the Eleventh Census were published,
Dr. Spahr started to estimate the total income of the nation for the
year 1890. In estimating it he found out that the total income of the
manufacture and mechanical trades alone amounted to
$2,790,000,000, including their net profits of $1,116,000,000 for the
year. The total number of persons engaged in these trades was
5,091,000, of whom 4,650,000 were wage-earners, while the
remaining 441,000 were officers, firm members and clerks.
Disregarding these, the average of actual wages of the wage-earners
for the year was $360. After that year these meager wages, by
reduction and unemployment, “had decreased 25 per cent,” says Dr.
Spahr.
[137]
But if we regard the average reduction of these wages at 10 cents
a day only, and the average labor year at 250 days, leaving thus a
sufficient room for unemployment, we then
find that the 4,650,000 wage-earners were
losing $116,250,000 every year. And
distributing the same losses over seven years,
they have lost $813,750,000 worth of their energy in favor of the
trusts and combinations. The losses, however, have been greater
than this amount, although we consider only this minimum, which is
simply an increase in the injustice brought about by the principle of
dividogenesure.
But while the real producers of wealth thus constantly lose their
energy in products, the net profits of the trusts of these industries
for the year 1890 amounted to $1,116,000,000.
[138]
This great yearly
income excludes all expenses, and excludes even the yearly waste of
machinery, tools, and of the other capital used in operations.

65. NET INCOMES OF
THE TRUSTS.
COST OF
PRODUCTION.
EXTORTION FROM
Obtaining such profits seven times in seven
years, these trusts have profited themselves by
about $7,812,000,000. And these enormous
profits accrued to them for nothing more than
the trouble of buying the machinery and other capital that the real
producers of wealth operated upon, mostly under hired supervision.
And while the human and mechanical forces work out these results,
the real beneficiaries do nothing but speculate on the ways of
concentrating the entire increase of wealth to their hands.
The speculative efficiency of these trusts and the profound
injustice of it will be more apparent, if we remember that these
profits do, not only imply the systematic extortion of the crystallized
energy of the real producers of wealth by means of exorbitancy in
dividogenesure, but they imply a similar extortion from the public at
large, which consume the products of these industries for excessive
payments.
The question of the “excess of selling price over the cost of
production” in these industries has been well ascertained. A cost of
production according to economists, implies
cost of materials used; salaries, wages, rent,
taxes, insurance, repairs paid; waste of
machinery, instruments, and of other capital
valued; in short, it implies all expenses, including reasonable
percentage on stock and reasonable remuneration for the troubles of
capitalists and entrepreneurs. And all these expenses must be
collected by means of selling prices from consumers of the products.
While what is unreasonable in such prices under ordinary
circumstances is called an “excess of selling price over the cost of
production.” This excess was raised by the trusts up to 12.95 per
cent in 1890.
[139]
If then we take the selling prices even of the total profits of
$1,116,000,000 of the manufacture and mechanical trades for the
year 1890,
[140]
and subtract this excess from it,
we find that the excess amounted to

66. THE PUBLIC.
SPECIAL LOSSES OF
THE FARMERS.
$144,522,000 in one year. Admitting that the
above percentage sustained some fluctuations,
we cannot but think that, with the increasing activity in combinations
of the trusts, this percentage of the excess must have increased
soon after that year. So that the average of it, from 1891 to 1897
inclusive, must have been carried on by the trusts in different ways
and means. If so, then they must have exacted from the consuming
public fully $1,011,654,000 worth of its wealth, as an excess of
selling price over the cost of production of the goods consumed. This
loss of the public wealth, of course, does not exclude the losses of
the families worth $5,000 and over; nor does it include any relation
to exports of the products of these trades. The loss simply indicates
an extortion from the public by perverted morality and profound
selfishness of the combines.
The next item in the concentration of wealth has been drawn from
the agricultural regions.
It has been estimated that the wages and earnings of all farmers
from 1890 to 1895 have fallen over 20 per cent;
[141]
and that
8,497,000 persons engaged in agriculture have
suffered from the fall, according to the
estimates of Dr. Spahr,
[142]
which he based
upon various reports. If, however, we admit
only 10 cents of this loss from every person, every labor day, in
favor of the various monopolies, trusts and combinations which use
the raw materials and transport the agricultural materials and
products, we find that in about 266 working days in one year the
above people lost $226,020,200 worth of their products. Distributing
these losses equally over seven years we find that these people have
lost and the monopolies, etc., have gained about $1,582,141,400
worth of their wealth for nothing. And this is only the minimum loss
that was carried throughout the period of seven years, as constant
drain.
Another item of similar losses is represented by the 350,000 miners
whose wages since 1890 have fallen “exceptionally low.”
[143]
So that

67. SPECIAL LOSSES OF
THE MINERS.
PROFITS OF THE
MINING
MONOPOLIES.
ALL PRODUCTS
ABSORBED BY
COMBINATIONS.
it would be perfectly safe to regard the average
fall in their daily wages at 15 cents, and the
labor year at 266 days, allowing again for a
possible unemployment. This being so, they
have lost about $13,965,000 in one year. And as their average
wages did not really rise again during the period under
consideration, they must, therefore, have lost about $97,755,000
worth of their labor energy in favor of the mining trusts and
monopolies. While the profits of these monopolies in 1890 amounted
to $80,000,000,
[143]
when the total income was $210,000,000 which
we leave out of further consideration. The
$80,000,000 profits must naturally have
increased with these monopolies. But even if
repeated as they were in that year, they must
have amounted to $560,000,000 during the seven years.
Considering the excess of selling price over the cost of production
here at the rate of 12.95 per cent, this amount of net profits
includes $72,520,000 worth of the public losses, of unjustifiable
extortion.
Beside all this, I find the telephone and telegraph monopolies
[144]
had an increase of $229,624,566, and the railroad monopolies
[144]
of
$80,377,053 in their net earnings over and above the amount on pp.
101, 150. The same course is true of many other monopolies and
combinations.
And as Henry B. Brown, Associate Justice of the United States
Supreme Court, in an address at the Yale Law School, June 24,
1895, said:
“If no student can light his lamp without paying to one company; if
no housekeeper can buy a pound of meat or of sugar without
swelling the receipts of two or three all
pervading trusts, what is to prevent the entire
productive industry of the country becoming
ultimately absorbed by a hundred gigantic
corporations?”
[145]
The foregoing facts clearly show that the

68. INCREASE OF
POPULATION.
corporations, whether under boards of trustees or under directors of
monopolies, with the principle of dividogenesure do, not only absorb
the entire mass of products of the people, but absorb even the
wealth that was formerly produced and now being gradually lost.
But let us now turn to the meaning of the increase of the
population in connection with the preceding facts and estimates for
the seven years. The table on the next page shows it.
Increase of Population.
Years.Individuals.
Percents
in Cities.
Years.Individuals.
Percents
in Cities.
17903,929,2143.35185023,191,89712.49
18005,308,4633.97186031,443,32116.13
18107,239,8814.93187038,588,37120.93
18209,633,8224.93188050,155,78322.57
183012,866,0206.72189062,622,25029.20
184017,069,4538.52189771,551,571
[146]
The preceding table shows that, from 1891 to 1897 inclusively, the
population of the United States increased by about 8,929,321
individuals, or, distributing this number over
seven years, the increase will be 1,250,000
souls in each successive year. And the
approximate proportions of this increase
indicate that every year about 105,665 new families were
reproduced by the 5,246,334 families that hire their homes; and
about 31,698 by the 1,624,765 families that hire their farms, leaving
out here the propertied. And the heritage of these 137,363 newly
formed families under the conditions is to be homeless and landless
subjects of dividogenesure, even as their unfortunate parents are.
For scarcely any of them could acquire property and thus escape
paying rent.

69. RENT PAID FOR
HOUSES.
RENT PAID FOR
FARMS.
If then we conclude that the one set of the newly born families
consisted of the tenants of rentable homes,
while the other of the tenants rentable farms,
we must admit that they paid at least the same
average rents for homes and farms as their
parents did. Therefore, the first set per family paid $9.50 a month as
follows:
Table of the House Rent Paid.
105,665families in 7 years paid$ 84,320,670
105,665families in 6 years paid 72,274,860
105,665families in 5 years paid 60,229,050
105,665families in 4 years paid 48,183,240
105,665families in 3 years paid 36,137,430
105,665families in 2 years paid 24,091,620
105,665families in 1 year   paid 12,045,810
739,655 Total$337,282,680
Thus the homeless families of the year 1891 paid the largest
amount of the house rents up to the end of
1897. Meanwhile the other yearly additions of
the new families paid less and less, on account
of having been younger in age. The number of
the increased families renting houses, then, was 739,655, and the
total of the rent they paid was $337,282,680.
The increased families of the farming occupations, by having paid
the average rent of $2.75 per acre, for the average of 136 acres of
land per family,
[147]
have paid sums as follows:

70. INCREASE OF
RENTED FARMS.
Table of Rent Paid for Land:
31,698families in 7 years paid$ 82,985,364
31,698families in 6 years paid 71,130,312
31,698families in 5 years paid 59,275,260
31,698families in 4 years paid 47,420,208
31,698families in 3 years paid 35,565,156
31,698families in 2 years paid 23,710,104
31,698families in 1 year   paid 11,855,052
221,886 Total$331,941,456
That’s what the increase of the homeless and landless population
means. The newly formed families could neither avoid paying the
rents in favor of the same landed and propertied rich; nor could they
avoid paying indirect taxes in favor of the national government, as
we shall soon see. And they could not avoid being the slaves of
dividogenesure, nor of being victims of extortion by various trusts
and monopolies. In making our final conclusion of the profits and
losses, the above amounts of $669,224,136 worth of paid rents by
the increased families will be included into the previous totals of
house and land rents.
But, in respect to all farmers’ rents and the average acreage, it
should again be noticed that we have dealt only with minimums of
their expenditure in favor of the land monopolies. For, “according to
the abstract of the eleventh census (p. 97),
farms cultivated by their owners increased 9.56
per cent; rented farms, 41.04 per cent, and
farms rented for a share in product,
[148]
19.65
per cent. In the north central division farms cultivated by their
owners increased less than 1 per cent, while rented farms increased
66 per cent. In the North Atlantic division, rented farms increased
only 6 per cent, while farms cultivated by their owners actually
diminished. The farmers thus complain that they are losing
possession of their farms and becoming tenant farmers.”
[149]

71. PERCENTAGE OF
INDEBTED FARMS.
INCREASE OF
PUBLIC DEBT.
On p. 112 we have seen the enormous amount of indebtedness on
the owned farms in the United States.
[150]
“The percentage of
incumbered farms was, for the United States,
47; Kansas, 30; Iowa, 32; New Jersey and
Mississippi, 34; Nebraska, Delaware, and South
Carolina, 35; South Dakota, 39; and at the
other extreme, Oklahoma, 95; Utah and New Mexico, 85; Arizona
and Idaho, 74; Montana, 73; Maine, 71.”
[151]
This economic state of
the farms and farmers continued to exist from 1890. Consequently
there is enough evidence to make one sure that thousands of farm
mortgagors have lost their mortgaged farms by foreclosure, and
have become merely tenant farmers without real property. The
increase of the propertyless through mortgages may even be greater
than through the increase of the population, though we regard only
the latter.
Seeing also that the “Principal of Public Debt” has increased from
$1,549,206,126 in 1890 to $2,092,686,024 in 1899,
[152]
it is
probable, therefore, that the indebtedness of private families has
also greatly increased up to the end of 1897.
Yet, except the annual interest charge against
the indebtedness in force from 1890, neither
the increase of the mortgage losses, nor the
increase of the gains from them, has entered into our accounts,
even as the great net earnings of the non-national banks, often
drawing immense profits from mortgages, etc., have been totally
omitted from our estimate.
[153]
If, therefore, there should be any decrease in the few unrevised
net earnings of the natural monopolies after 1890,
[154]
the net
earnings of the above banks alone would abundantly fill up the loss
with a great remaining superfluity. Seeing also that the cities grow
and the population increases, increasing every business in favor of
the same monopolies, no one will doubt that our conclusions will be
moderate, and especially so, because we have failed to ascertain the
net incomes of several trusts.

72. As to the trusts, the American Anti-Trust Journal, No. 3, Chicago,
says: “Go and talk to the thousands of commercial travelers—those
skirmishers on the firing line of commercial independence—who
have been thrown out of employment by the trusts. They will tell
you of hundreds and hundreds of business men who have been
forced out of business within the last four or five years. They will tell
you how the trusts ordered one man after another to close his
establishment. They will give you the names of ambitious and
thriving proprietors who are now clerks or agents of gigantic
corporate combinations, all hope dead, all opportunity gone.”
Dealing as it does with the trusts of still later development, the array
of facts in this Journal shows that our final conclusions for 1897 can
only be very moderate.
This being so, and disregarding the crooked ways of making
profits, let us then make up the complete summary of the preceding
losses by the United States people during the period from 1891 to
1897 inclusive, as follows:
2d Table of the Concentration of Wealth.
Monopolies and Combinations. Total Net Incomes.
The natural monopolies
[155]
$ 4,255,826,950
Mortgagee monopolies
[156]
3,775,470,286
Owners of rentable houses
[157]
5,503,857,212
Monopolies of rentable lands
[158]
4,585,276,226
Owners of rentable offices, etc., in cities 3,033,425,468
Manufacture and mechanical trades 7,812,000,000
Mining monopolies 560,000,000
Grand total $29,526,156,142
National and local taxes paid by them
[159]
3,455,963,952
The Total Concentration of Wealth $26,070,192,190
The total increase of national wealth 21,787,908,803
Excess of net incomes over and above the total increase of
the national wealth
$ 4,282,283,387

73. TOTAL LOSS OF
WEALTH.
LOSS OF THE
PREVIOUS WEALTH.
The above table of the net incomes shows the conclusions that
must deeply astonish the thinking people. It shows that a “terrible
change has occurred in the conditions of life in America within
fifteen or twenty years.” But this concentration of wealth has taken
place within seven years, when the national expenditures for wars
and the incomes of monopolies and trusts started to increase. The
latter obtained $26,070,192,190.
Think of this total concentration of the wealth in seven years! It is
twenty-six thousand seventy millions of dollars’ worth of wealth.
While the total increase of the national wealth,
during the same time, only amounted to
$21,787,908,803, which was entirely
concentrated in the hands of monopolies and
combinations, together with the additional concentration of yet
another amount of $4,282,283,387. This astonishing fact indicates
that the net income of about one million families in the United States
has been greater by $4,282,283,387 than the total increase of the
wealth collectively produced by the nation during the period under
consideration.
The whole increase of the wealth then has been lost in favor of the
few. But what does this over four billion dollars difference between
the total increase and the total net incomes of the monopolies and
combinations mean in view of the situation? Where does this over
four billion dollars’ worth of wealth come from?
This surplus amount of $4,282,283,387 of the net incomes
certainly cannot mean anything else than that the families,
unconnected with monopolies, trusts, and other combinations were
quickly eating up themselves. They not only
have absolutely lost all that they produced
during the time of seven years, but have also
lost $4,282,283,387 worth of the wealth which
they owned in 1890. So that the aggregate of about $9,260,228,000
worth of wealth which was owned by the 11,190,152 “families worth
$5,000 and under”
[160]
in that year, must have been greatly reduced

74. THE POOR GROW
ABSOLUTELY
POORER.
THE REASONS WHY
THE RICH GROW
ABSOLUTELY
RICHER.
by monopolies, trusts and combinations. There cannot be any doubt,
too, that hundreds of thousands of the “families worth $5,000 and
over”
[160]
have also suffered from the same causes. Hence, the
absolute loss of $4,282,283,387 worth of the previously owned
wealth must have been shared by all in favor of the very few families
whose undoubted prosperity has indeed been unusual. For they have
concentrated the enormous total of over $26,000,000,000 worth of
the people’s wealth in seven years, and have thus made the greatly
increased population much poorer in 1897 than it was in the year
1890.
And this fact of growing poverty has not been unsuspected. For, if
Mr. W. H. Mallock, in trying to prove the contrary, admits “that the
rich” in England “do grow richer and the poor
grow relatively poorer, because their numbers
increase, although it seems that in the
distribution of wealth a greater share (of it)
falls on their part.”
[161]
As for the United States, it was also said that
“since 1873 the poor have grown relatively, if not absolutely
poorer.”
[162]
The method used here for establishing this fact leaves no
doubt that the rich in both countries do grow absolutely richer and
the well-to-do and the poor in the United States do grow relatively
and absolutely poorer: accordingly, “the largest fortunes” in this
country “are increasing most rapidly,” says Dr. Charles R. Henderson.
[163]
The reasons why “the largest fortunes are increasing most rapidly”
have already been indicated in this and in the preceding chapters.
The most potent of these reasons are: 1. The
profoundly unjust and abnormal principle of
dividogenesure, which further and further
underrates the value of human labor energy
and overrates the value of mechanical forces in
favor of the wealthy. 2. The too high percentages for loans and
capital, which deprive mortgagors of the fruits of their labor and
cause the losses of property. 3. Abnormal excess of selling prices
over cost of production, and lowering prices on raw materials. 4.

75. EXTORTION FROM
THE PUBLIC.
DIRECTORS OF THE
HIGHWAYS.
Different frauds and extortions carried on by means of “watering-
stock” and so on. All these and other unjustifiable means are freely
used by monopolies and combinations against the general well-being
of the United States people who are constantly robbed and
speculated upon by a very few members of the nation.
As an example of the stock-watering by railroad monopolies, I
introduce here the exact paragraphs of Dr. Spahr who, after
representing the table of figures of stocks and bonds and the cost of
railroads to original investors, says:
“It should be observed, however, that the sum upon which the
public is paying interest is not the total capitalization of the railroads,
nor even the stocks and bonds not held by
other railroads, but rather the sum upon which
five per cent net is realized by the roads. This
sum in 1890 was $6,627,000,000.
[164]
Not from
the standpoint of socialism, but from the standpoint of common
morality, which condemns as robbery both the refusal of the public
to pay interest upon capital actually lent it, and the compelling of the
public to pay interest on capital never lent it, the two thousand and
odd millions of railroad capital representing no investment
[165]
is
simply capitalized extortion.
“But not even the fruits of this extortion have gone to the original
investors. The expenditures of railroads and the dividends they
declare have been so largely in the hands of
loosely controlled directors, that railroad
construction, railroad purchases, and railroad
speculation have all served as means to divert
the property of the stockholders on the outside, into the pockets of
the managers on the inside. Nearly all the profits of this extortion
from the public have passed into the hands of a comparatively few
men intrusted with the management of the public highways.”
[166]
These passages simply indicate another way of extortion from the
public of the wealth it creates.

76. Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.
More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge
connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and
personal growth every day!
ebookbell.com