Search results

This article discusses increasingly heterogeneous nature of social policy in contemporary societies, focusing on the analysis of public attitudes towards the role of state, individual and family in the social provision. Existing literature does not present one answer what institutions should have a central role in creating social welfare as liberal and Marxist theories have different answers about the role of the state in social provision. Lithuania was selected as a case for analysis because it is interesting as a post-soviet country. In this context, the question is whether people still have big expectations for the state's role in social provision (as in soviet times) or are prepared to take responsibility themselves. The paper is based on the results of two interrelated projects: the research project 'International Social Survey Programme: Monitoring of Lithuanian social problems (ISSP-LT)'[1] and the research project 'Monitoring of social problems: implementation of International Social Survey Program (ISSP)'[2]. The paper presents empirical results of two representative public opinion surveys. The results of empirical studies reveal that people still have big expectations for the role of the state in social provision and welfare. The state should be mainly responsible for the provision in situations of old age, unemployment, illness, and durable physical or mental handicap. [1] The paper is partly based upon results of research project 'International Social Survey Programme: Monitoring of Lithuanian social problems (ISSP-LT)', funded by a grant from the Research Council of Lithuania (No. SIN-7/2012). The project is being implemented in the period of 2012-2013. The goal of this project is to continue the long-term monitoring of social problems by implementing the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) in Lithuania. The project analyses the attitudes and experiences of Lithuanian population in the following thematic areas: 'Social Policy', 'Family, Work and Gender Roles', 'National Identity' and ...

Social innovations are usually understood as new ideas, initiatives, or solutions that make it possible to meet the challenges of societies in fields such as social security, education, employment, culture, health, environment, housing, and economic development. On the one hand, many citizen science activities serve to achieve scientific as well as social and educational goals. Thus, these actions are opening an arena for introducing social innovations. On the other hand, some social innovations are further developed, adapted, or altered after the involvement of scientist-supervised citizens (laypeople or volunteers) in research and with the use of the citizen science tools and methods such as action research, crowdsourcing, and community-based participatory research. Such approaches are increasingly recognized as crucial for gathering data, addressing community needs, and creating engagement and cooperation between citizens and professional scientists. However, there are also various barriers to both citizen science and social innovation. For example, management, quality and protection of data, funding difficulties, non-recognition of citizens' contributions, and limited inclusion of innovative research approaches in public policies. In this volume, we open theoretical as well as empirically-based discussion, including examples, practices, and case studies of at least three types of relations between citizen science and social innovation: (1) domination of the citizen science features over social innovation aspects; (2) domination of the social innovation features over the citizen science aspects; and (3) the ways to achieve balance and integration between the social innovation and citizen science features. Each of these relationships highlights factors that influence the development of the main scales of sustainability of innovations in the practice. These innovations are contributing to a new paradigm of learning and sharing knowledge as well as interactions and socio-psychological development of participants. Also, there are factors that influence the development of platforms, ecosystems, and sustainability of innovations such as broad use of the information and communications technologies (ICTs) including robotics and automation; emerging healthcare and health promotion models; advancements in the development and governance of smart, green, inclusive and age-friendly cities and communities; new online learning centers; agri-food, cohousing or mobility platforms; and engagement of citizens into co-creation or co-production of services delivered by public, private, non-governmental (NGOs) organizations as well as non-formal entities.

The presented Research Topic explores the potential of citizen science to contribute to the development of social innovations. It sets the ground for analysis of mutual relations between two strong and embedded in the literature concepts: citizen science and social innovation. Simultaneously, the collection opens a discussion on how these two ideas are intertwined, what are the significant barriers, and the need to use citizen science for social innovation.

The article deals with the analysis of the role of ideology in party activities. The empirical data show that ideology is not important part of party activities. In Lithuanian political map we can notice just one type of cleavage, ie., Communist -- anti-Communist cleavage. According to the data of empirical research, elite of party deputy dominates in institutionalized ways & sets the direction towards ideological position of the party. Interviews with the authorities of main political parties in Lithuania were conducted in 2007. The results of the interviews don't promise the long term political cleavages that could make the political life in Lithuania normal in nearest future. Though the authorities of Lithuanian parties have institutional possibilities to control party organization, however, they are not a power that may put Lithuanian parties in a clear ideological framework & foster coherence between parties & society. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractEmigration and population shrinkage are challenges faced in countries and communities throughout the world. Based on a systematic literature analysis of approximately 600 articles, we examine voluntary emigration through the lens of non‐economic factors, establishing a cohesive and coherent view of the literature landscape across disciplines and enabling discussion of how local governments and non‐governmental organizations might respond to emigration pressures nationally and locally. The factors identified in the literature are set within seven conceptual categories: personal ambition, personal relationships, quality of life, quality of working life, future opportunity, fitness to enter a new society and quality of governance. Focusing on these factors, a set of tools for local government and non‐governmental organization action are proposed to manage emigration‐induced population shrinkage, including citizen participation, strategic planning and management, cross‐sector partnerships and capacity investments in the non‐profit sector.

Lithuania has been challenged with voluntary emigration since it achieved independence from the Soviet Union, patterns that have been driven by quests for individual and national freedom and self-determination. This book explores municipal responses to help reduce the strain of emigration in Lithuania, with lessons for other nations and communities.