Social work practices and research with Sámi people and communities in the frame of indigenous social work

This special issue is a unique contribution to the research discussions on the Sámi people and communities in the area of social work. The Sámi homeland is located in Norway, Sweden, Finland and Northwest Russia, in the north Barents region. This Arctic area where the Sámi people live has been subjected to dramatic societal and cultural changes. For example, their forced assimilation into the mainstream culture has had many impacts: the loss of a traditional way of living, the loss of their native language and oppression by the main national culture. The historical background is still reflected in the lives of the Sámi people (see more in e.g. Lehtola, 2002, 2016). This special edition is timely because it addresses the need for culturally sensitive knowledge about welfare issues, social service delivery questions and social work practices regarding the Sámi people and communities (cf. Hedlund and Moe, 2010).

The issue leans on the indigenisation of social work and promotes the development of local theories and practices by recognising silent voices and experiences. It aims to develop theory, research and practice in international social work by analysing locality-specific, culturally relevant social work practices and research within a globalising world from the Sámi point of view (e.g. Dominelli, 2012; Gray and Coates, 2008). It stresses the meanings of cultural competence in social work practices and research as well as the ability to integrate cultural knowledge and sensitivity with skills for more effective and culturally appropriate assistance and knowledge production processes (e.g. Weaver, 1999). Cultural competence is tightly connected to the social work ethical principles. It is a process by which individuals and systems respond respectfully to people in a manner that recognises, affirms and values the worth of individuals, families and communities and protects and preserves the dignity of each. The aim of this special issue is to produce ethically considered research knowledge about social work with Sámi people and communities. Accordingly, the issue is located among promoting acts to respect ethnic and cultural diversity and empower ethnic minority groups (e.g. Chau and Yu, 2009).

The focus of the issue is on social work practices and research with Sámi people and communities in the frame of indigenous social work (see Gray et al., 2008). Dealing with indigenous social work issues is a sensitive phenomenon. It is well known that an insider perspective offers deep and reliable ways of knowing that respect cultural heritage and ways of living (e.g. Hart, 2010). During the editing process, we have pondered questions like ‘Who has a right to know about or “with” indigenous Sámi people? How can knowledge about social work with Sámi people be produced in an ethically sound way?’. We do not take a stance towards these questions, but we highlight the meanings of motives behind knowledge production. Motives, as background of research and knowledge production, define how equality and social justice can be promoted in social work research at both a practical and an ideological level (see Mikkonen et al., 2016).

We are Finnish, and although we live and work in Northern Finland, we are not Sámi. So, from the starting point this issue does not meet the criteria of indigenous methodology (e.g. Hart, 2010; Smith, 1999). Our standpoint as editors is as outsider learners. We are not experts in the area of social work with Sámi people, but as social work researchers and educators adopting a rights-based approach, we see the importance of hearing and recognising different, silent and rejected voices (cf. Mikkonen et al., 2016). The knowledge produced from this orientation is essential from a social work education viewpoint. Thus, our incentive in editing this special issue is the need for knowledge that supports the formation of culturally relevant skills, values and practices that are sensitive and reciprocal (e.g. Gray et al., 2008.). We have seen this need in our research projects concerning child sexual abuse and substance abuse (e.g. Laitinen and Väyrynen, 2012) in which Sámi people’s needs have not been met adequately. Hence, we believe that professional responsibility to support knowledge production concerns all of us.

Articles in this issue show how social work practices and research processes with the Sámi can be conducted by leaning on local resources that include the cultural heritage and human relationships providing social capital (Dominelli, 2015; Sim and Dominelli, 2016). Authors from Norway and Finland describe from different angles the situation of the Sámi and the needs and the processes of developing social work and research practices.

Jan Erik Henriksen starts by offering a historical view on how professional social work developed in the Sámi area in Norway. Leaning on processual analysis, he introduces a decolonising perspective based on post-colonial thinking and critical indigenous philosophy as an alternative to a multicultural approach. The post-colonial approach safeguards the desire to recognise colonisation and its repercussions in a number of areas other than language and culture. A post-colonial approach also focuses on reconciliation and restoration. A critical indigenous philosophy recognises indigenous practices and the need for dialogue between indigenous peoples and national governments.

Linda Järvensivu, Anneli Pohjola and Marjo Romakkaniemi bring forth a current view of social work practices by analysing the meanings produced by Finnish social workers in the course of their work with Sámi people and communities. The Sámi social workers stressed the special nature of Sámi social work more than those from outside the Sámi community. The ‘outsiders’ recognised their lack of knowledge. They could take the position of learner, where they were able to extend their cultural competence, or the position of delegator, which meant delegating power to the client in the form of negotiating the meanings of his or her Sámi identity. Their analysis stresses the necessity to define issues relating to Sámi social work within the culture of Sámi people, developing responsive services and strengthening client participation.

Sanna Valkonen and Sandra Wallenius-Korkalo analyse the multidimensional question of religion, culture and social work. Their article illustrates the complex of colonial relations and Laestadianism – conservative and the largest revivalist movement in northern Scandinavia – as an integral factor that still affects people’s everyday lives in the community. They give a detailed picture of how identifying social problems and solving them, especially when working with religious and ethnic minority groups, requires context-specific empirical knowledge that takes into account the interplay of communities’ power structures and relations. Their analysis shows how social work with Sámi people needs to pay attention to the multiplicity of ‘Sáminess’: Sámi culture and communities are pervaded by a range of relations and traditions, making it important to identify internal differences and multiple subject positions.

Jan Erik Henriksen and Ida Hydle analyse how knowledge-based participation and mediation tools combining conflict management and professional education affect the handling of health and welfare issues in Northern Sámi areas. Their research utilises collaborative methodology and focuses on the contexts of child protection and welfare, family counselling and reindeer husbandry. Unlike other indigenous areas practising talking or family circle methodology, their work shows that the Sámi people may prefer indirect forms of mediation. If community circles are used, they need thorough preparation and adjustment to the Sámi cultural ethos of iesbirget and birgehallat. ¹

Anneli Pohjola examines welfare services, social work in particular, analysing their relation to and responsibility for the survival of the language and culture of the Sámi as an indigenous people. Her analysis emphasises the meaning of language in social work, including considerations of its historical, social, cultural, institutional and contextual dimensions. Culturally conscious social work is fundamentally culturally sensitive. It is based on an understanding of, respect for and trust in difference and people’s own values and orientations. Culturally conscious and sensitively oriented social work critically examines the cultural relevance of everything it does.

Lydia Heikkilä reflects on the ethical and cultural sensitivity aspects of the knowledge-building process accompanying research on indigenous people. In the course of the research process, it is vital to be conscious of the epistemological questions involved in applying methods and to make visible their relationship with indigenous people’s social, historical, geographical and spiritual environments. These ideas challenge academic research to develop innovative approaches and methods that use partnership and participatory practices that respect subjectivity and community.

Reidunn H Nygård and Merete Saus ponder whether greater emphasis on communities in research ethics could benefit the development of Sámi social work. They locate their analysis in the frame of indigenous methodology by placing knowledge production within a local context, taking history and local culture into account. The comparison of ethical regulations in indigenous social work research in Norway and the United States shows that ethical validation in Norway is highly centred on internal ethical validation. The focus is on the safety of the participants, and there is little concern for the potential consequences of the research for the community as a whole. At the same time, the requirements from tribal committees in the US have resulted in a greater emphasis on dialogue and broader deliberation with the involved parties. Results highlight the need for debates about research ethics in the field of Sámi social work among researchers and social workers, where Sámi society should be actively included.

On the whole, these articles raise further questions, such as whether decision makers and professionals are willing to take actions to meet peoples’ and communities’ needs, and how this ‘will’ can be made true in a time of austerity. These articles remind readers that people in diverse settings need social workers who listen to their voices, advocate for them and support them to take part both in knowledge production and the management and design of services and social work practices. How social work practitioners and academics can work alongside indigenous peoples and promote social justice and well-being – not only ideologically, but also practically – is a vital cornerstone of every encounter.