Makeshift Work in a Changing Labour Market
Show Less

Makeshift Work in a Changing Labour Market

The Swedish Model in the Post-Financial Crisis Era

Edited by Christina Garsten, Jessica Lindvert and Renita Thedvall

In the aftermath of the global financial crisis, people who had never before had cause to worry about losing their jobs entered the ranks of the unemployed for the first time. In Sweden, the welfare state has been radically challenged and mass unemployment has become a reality in what used to be viewed as a model case for a full employment society. With an emphasis on Sweden in the context of transnational regulatory change, Makeshift Work in a Changing Labour Market discusses how the market mediates employment and moves on to explore the ways in which employees adjust to a new labour market. Focusing on the legibility, measurability and responsibility of jobseekers, the expert contributors of this book bring together an analysis of activation policy and new ways of organizing the mediation of work, with implications for the individual jobseeker.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 10: In the name of evidence-based practice: managing social workers through science, standards and transparency

Renita Thedvall


It is possible to order a starter package in evidence-based practice for social work from the Swedish government agency, the National Board of Health and Welfare. The package explains what evidence-based practice means in social work and gives examples of systematic, evidence-based methods that social workers can use in their daily work life. It explains the criteria set out by the National Board of Health and Welfare for what is to be considered evidence-based method. The criteria are based on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is optimal. A ranking of 1 refers to a randomized controlled trial (RCT), and preferably two trials showing the same results. In a randomized controlled trial, participants are randomly assigned to receive either an intervention or control treatment (often standard care services). This allows the effect of the intervention to be studied in groups of people who are: (1) the same at the outset, and (2) treated the same way, except for the intervention(s) being studied. The idea is then that any differences seen in the groups’ outcomes can be attributed to the difference in treatment alone, and not to bias or chance. A ranking of 2 on the scale refers to non-randomized controlled trials with a placebo or untreated control group. A 3 refers to pre- and post-evaluations without a placebo or untreated control group, a 4 to correlation studies, and a 5 to expert opinion.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.