Advertisement

Mindfulness: A Politically Sensitizing Concept. Care and Social Sustainability as Issues

  • Eva Senghaas-KnoblochEmail author
Chapter
Part of the CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance book series (CSEG)

Abstract

Mindfulness is introduced as a sensitizing concept not only in the organizational but also in the political realm, exemplified by issues of global sustainable development and care:

In the first part the ongoing epochal changes in the social organization of work are outlined with respect to their impact on gender relations in the context of globalisation. The second part describes the changes in the contemporary world of work as neglect of human needs and rights and as an expression of political mindlessness with regard to the function of care for human well-being and social cohesion of societies. Social sustainability is in danger when care responsibilities or activities are neglected, ignored or devalued. The third part discusses two recent political initiatives to overcome the neglect of the vital care activities on the basis of a new political mindfulness for sustainable social development: The new ILO-Convention 189 on Decent Work for Domestic Workers and the “Recommendations” of the EU-Social Platform for a Caring Society in Europe, both from 2011. The ILO-Convention 189 deals with employment conditions in the household under the perspective of rights at (paid) work, the other applies a broader perspective acknowledging the human rights character of care activities. The paper concludes with a reflection on the relationship between mindfulness in the political and in the organisational context.

Keywords

Social sustainability Global care crisis Political mindlessness Sensitizing concept ILO Convention 189 Decent work for domestic workers Social Platform Caring society Spirit of Philadelphia 

References

  1. Acker J (2006) Inequality regimes. Gender, class, and race in organizations. Gend Soc 20(4):441–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brundlandt-Report (1987) UN world commission on environment and development A/42/427: our common future, Geneva. http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-02.htm#I. Accessed 5 Aug 2012
  3. Daly M (2011) What adult worker model? A critical look at recent social policy reform in Europe from a gender and family perspective. Soc Polit 18(1):1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Schutter De O (2010) The right to food. Geneva/New York: United Nations Publications. http://www.srfood.org/images/stories/pdf/otherdocuments/factsheet34en1.pdf. Accessed 1 Nov 2012
  5. Esping-Andersen G (1990) The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  6. European Commission (2010) Europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, COM(2010) 2020 final. Brussels. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:2020:FIN:EN:PDF. Accessed 15 Oct 2012
  7. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (2012) Fifth European working conditions survey. Dublin. http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/htmlfiles/ef11821.htm. Accessed 1 Nov 2012
  8. Fraser N (1997) Justice interruptus. Critical reflections on the ‘postsocialist’ condition. Routledge, New York/LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Gerhard U (1979) Verhältnisse und Verhinderungen. Frauenarbeit, Familie und Rechte der Frauen im 19. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M: Edition SuhrkampGoogle Scholar
  10. Giullari S, Lewis J (2005) The adult worker model family, gender equality and care. The search for new policy principles, and the possibilities and problems of a capabilities approach, UNRISD pp-spd-19, paper 19. http://www.unrisd.org/__80256b3c005bccf9.nsf/0/bb78cf0f20c2104fc1256ff6002ba3f5?opendocument&panel=seriespapers&click=. Accessed 2 Nov 2012
  11. Gottschall U, Schwarzkopf M (2010) Irreguläre arbeit in privathaushalten. Arbeitspapier 217. Düsseldorf: Hans Böckler Stiftung. www.boeckler.de
  12. Heintz J, Lund F (2012) Welfare regimes and social policy. A review of the role of labour and employment. UNRISD pp-gd-17, paper 17Google Scholar
  13. Heintze C (2012) Auf der Highroad – der skandinavische Weg zu einem zeitgemäßen Pflegesystem. Ein Vergleich zwischen fünf nordischen Ländern und Deutschland. Expertise im Auftrag der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Bonner Universitäts-Buchdruckerei, BonnGoogle Scholar
  14. Hochschild AR (2000) Global care chains and emotional surplus value. In: Hutton W, Giddens A (eds) Global capitalism. The New Press, New York, pp 130–146Google Scholar
  15. Hoffmann F, Rodrigues R (2010) Informal carers: who takes care of them? Vienna: European Centre for Social Welfare. Policy Brief. April 2010Google Scholar
  16. International Labour Organization (2011) Press release 16 June 2011. http://www.ilo.org/ilc/ILCSessions/100thSession/media-centre/press-releases/WCMS_157891/lang--en/index.htm?ssSourceSiteId=global. Accessed 1 Nov 2012
  17. Jenkins H, Lee E, Rodgers G (2007) The quest for a fair globalization three years on. Assessing the impact of the world commission on the social dimension of globalization. International Labour Office, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  18. Laville J-L (2007) L’économie solidaire. Une perspective internationale, Hachette LittératuresGoogle Scholar
  19. Marshall TH (1950) Citizenship and social class and other essays. University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Martínez D (2004) The world of work in the context of economic integration and trade liberalization. From the vintage point of the Americas. Geneva: ILO-Policy Integration Department Paper 145Google Scholar
  21. Meadows D, Meadows DH, Randers J, Behrens III, William W (1972) The limits to growth. Universe BooksGoogle Scholar
  22. Palley TI (2007) Financialization. What it is and why it matters. http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_525.pdf. Accessed 2 Nov 2012
  23. Justitia et P (2011). Menschenwürdige Arbeit für Hausangestellte – eine Frage von Geschlechtergerechtigkeit und Solidarität. Documentation of contributions to a conference on domestic workers, Cologne. http://www.justitia-et-pax.de/Dokumentation_-_final_-_Internet.pdf. Accessed 22 Feb 2011
  24. Peter G (2008) Soziale Nachhaltigkeit im Epochenbruch. Von der Notwendigkeit ihrer Einbettung in eine Konzeption primärer Arbeitspolitik. In: Guido B (ed) Soziale Nachhaltigkeit in flexiblen Arbeitsstrukturen. Problemfelder und arbeitspolitische Gestaltungsperspektiven. Lit Verlag, Münster, pp 59–75Google Scholar
  25. Polanyi K (1980/1944) The great transformation. New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Razavi S (2011) Rethinking care on a development context. An introduction. Dev Change 42(4):873–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Razavi S, Arza C, Braunstein E, Cook S, Goulding K (2012) Gendered impacts of globalization. Employment and social protection. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD). http://www.unrisd.org/80256B3C005BCCF9/search/6E16D1DC33F5D82BC12579D000478859?OpenDocument. Accessed 10 Aug 2012
  28. Roach S (2004) How global labour arbitrage will shape the world economy. http://ecocritique.free.fr/roachglo.pdf. Accessed 2 Nov 2012
  29. Schmidt J (2012) Achtsamkeit. Versuch zur Ethischen Theologie. Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie 54(1):23–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sengenberger W, Campbell D (eds) (1994) International labour standards and economic interdependence. International Labour Office, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  31. Senghaas-Knobloch E (2000) Wohin driftet die postindustrielle Gesellschaft? In Ulrich Menzel (ed) Vom Ewigen Frieden und vom Wohlstand der Nationen. Festschrift für Dieter Senghaas. Frankfurt/M: Edition Suhrkamp. Wohin driftet die Arbeitswelt, Wiesbaden, VS, pp 543–572Google Scholar
  32. Senghaas-Knobloch E (2010a) Decent work’ – eine weltweite Agenda für Forschung und Politik. In: Guido B, Peter B, Wolfgang R, Sandra S (eds) Decent work. Arbeitspolitische Gstaltungsperspektive für eine globalisierte und flexibilisierte Arbeitswelt. VS Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp 15–33Google Scholar
  33. Senghaas-Knobloch E (2010b) Sisyphos at work. On the efforts to achieve a fair, internationally recognised labour-and social order, University of Bremen, Research Center on Sustainability Studies (artec), artec paper 165. http://www.artec.uni-bremen.de/paper/paper.php?year=2010
  34. Senghaas-Knobloch E (2012) Beispiellos und herausfordernd – ein internationaler Arbeitsstandard für menschenwürdige Arbeit von Hausangestellten. Feministische Studien 30(2):119–127Google Scholar
  35. Social Platform (2004) Statement of values and objectives, adopted by general assembly 23 April 2004. http://cms.horus.be/files/99907/MediaArchive/SocialPlatformstatementofvaluesENFinal.pdf. Accessed 10 Aug 2012
  36. Social Platform (2011) Recommendations for care that respects the rights of individuals, guarantees access to services and promotes social inclusion, Brussels 2011. http://www.socialplatform.org/News.asp?news=28066. Accessed 10 Aug 2012
  37. Supiot A (2012) The spirit of Philadelphia. Social justice versus the total market. A new manifesto for global social justice. Verso, Brooklyn/London/ParisGoogle Scholar
  38. Trebilcock A (2004) International labour standards and the informal economy. In: Jean-Claude J, Bernard G (eds) Les normes internationales du travail. Mélanges en l’honneur de Nicolas Valticos. International Labour Office, Geneva, pp 585–613Google Scholar
  39. Waerness K (1996) The rationality of caring. In: Gordon S, Benner P, Noddings N (eds) Caregiving, readings in knowledge, practice, ethics and politics. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp 231–255Google Scholar
  40. Weber R (2011) Konfuzianische Selbstkultivierung als Philosphem und Politikum. Polylog 26:19–42Google Scholar
  41. WIDE, Women in Development Europe (WIDE Europe) (2009) Report of the WIDE annual conference 2009 ‘we care’ feminist responses to the care crises, 18–20 June, University of Basel, Basel. http://www.wide-network.ch/en/index.php. Accessed 10 Aug 2012
  42. Williams F (2011) Towards a transnational analysis of the political economy of care. In: Rianne M, Fiona R (eds) Feminist ethics and social policy. Towards a political economy of care. UBC Press, Vancouver/Toronto, pp 21–38Google Scholar
  43. World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization (2004) A fair globalization. Creating opportunities for all. International Labour Office, GenevaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Centre for Sustainability Studies (artec)University of BremenBremenGermany

Personalised recommendations