Carving a Professional Identity for Chinese Social Work Shaped by Universalisation, Indigenisation, and Culturalism

• Published in: The British journal of social work 2024-06, Vol.54 (4), p.1679-1697
• Main Authors: Meng, Qian, Gray, Mel, Bradt, Lieve, Roets, Griet
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Absorption; Case studies; Central government; Community research; Cultural values; Debates; Globalization; Identity; International social work; Political ideologies; Political power; Profession control; Professional identity; Social work; Social work research; Social workers; Sociocultural factors
• ISSN: 0045-3102; 1468-263X
• DOI: 10.1093/bjsw/bcad214

China provides an extremely interesting contemporary case study for the international social work research community, given its questioning of the pertinence of the international definition of social work and stance in relation to the debates surrounding universalisation, internationalisation and indigenisation. This article begins by examining the evolving identity of Chinese social work, grounded as it is in China’s political ideology and socio-cultural values. It then extends the debate on the paradoxical processes of universalisation, internationalisation and indigenisation within the international and Chinese social work discourse in light of the ascendance of Chinese culturalism. Finally, it addresses the impact of these interrelated processes on Chinese social work, as it struggled to adapt to the central government’s political control of the developing profession and social project to train 1.45 million social workers by 2020. It argues that, to avoid the Scylla of escaping into tradition (culturalism) and Charybdis of absorption into the West (universalisation), Chinese social work has become a blend of Western and indigenised knowledge still in search of a unique identity. This article first analyses China’s political ideology and socio-cultural values and examines the evolving professional identity of Chinese social work. It then extends the theoretical debate on universalisation–indigenisation occupying the international and Chinese social work community through the lens of culturalism. Finally, it shows the way in which contemporary social work in China has evolved from an interplay of internal forces, especially the central government taking political control through social policy to regulate the profession, and external universalising project, such as the international definition of social work and global education standards. It argues that Chinese social work has become a blend of Western and indigenised knowledge still in search of a unique identity.