This blog post examines why the integration of micro and macro social welfare methodologies is crucial for protecting human dignity and value.
Social welfare is premised on the ideology that “everyone should be able to live a human life without their dignity and value being compromised.” This ideology is being realized in modern society through various attempts to protect individual rights and resolve social inequality. To this end, diverse methodologies for social welfare practice have developed, and these methodologies exist precisely to realize this ideology.
Social welfare methodology consists of the specialized knowledge and skills necessary to help people in distress live with dignity. It can be broadly divided into two categories. One is the micro methodology, which focuses on the individual in need, individualizes the problem, and seeks solutions. Examples include individual counseling, therapeutic interventions, and psychological support. This approach emphasizes deeply understanding an individual’s problems and proposing tailored solutions. The other is macro methodology, which views problems collectively and devises solutions at the societal level. This approach considers how social structures or policies impact individuals’ lives, seeking solutions through social change or institutional improvements. This includes social movements, legislative activities, and public policy improvements.
Social welfare professionals may employ these methodologies to help those in need identify their problems and diagnose their causes, thereby empowering them to resolve their own issues. For example, when a family faces economic hardship, a social worker using a micro-level methodology might analyze the family’s financial situation, provide a customized financial plan, or assist them in accessing necessary resources. Conversely, a social worker employing a macro methodology might analyze the structural causes of economic hardship, such as minimum wage levels or rising housing costs, and pursue policy interventions to address these issues. Another approach involves influencing government policies or systems to aid problem resolution. Examples include improving welfare systems for the poor or introducing new support programs.
These two methodologies also differ in their relationship with the social system. Social work professionals utilizing the micro methodology show little interest in the social system itself and thus tend not to engage significantly in the formulation and implementation of social policy. They focus solely on effective methods to assist individuals within the social system—namely, strengthening their expertise in their clinical field of responsibility. For instance, when a mental health professional focuses on individual treatment methods, they primarily aim for the individual’s psychological stability and may not heavily consider the impact of social factors on the problem.
Conversely, professionals advocating a macro methodology place great importance on government policies or the social system itself, which influence individuals’ lives. This is because they believe that by changing government policies or influencing the social system, it can ultimately help individuals. They seek to promote societal change through collaboration with policymakers, organizing social movements, and raising public awareness. Consequently, they focus on the dynamic aspects of social forces emerging during societal development. They aim to advance the knowledge and techniques of social welfare methodology based on understanding government policy processes and the surrounding policy environment.
Historically, social welfare methodology developed primarily around micro-level approaches. Much of the content constituting current social welfare methodology has borrowed extensively from adjacent disciplines such as sociology, psychology, social psychology, psychiatry, and group dynamics. It is built upon these foundations as practice-oriented professional knowledge and skills necessary for helping people.
As a result, social welfare methodology has initially succeeded in equipping practitioners with the specialized knowledge and skills needed to address problems at the individual level or to effectively deliver welfare services. For example, psychological counseling techniques and individual support programs have developed as outcomes of this knowledge and skillset. However, it tends to overlook issues such as the relationship between the person receiving help and the social system, the process by which the needs of the socially vulnerable are reflected in policy, and the biases inherent within the social system itself.
This one-sidedly developed social welfare methodology focused solely on the act of delivering social welfare services itself. Consequently, it made it difficult to achieve the fundamental goal of social welfare: maintaining and preserving human dignity and value. This is because, relying solely on this abnormally developed social welfare methodology, it is difficult to critique government policies that influence the practice of social welfare or to propose creative alternatives.
Recently, various attempts have been made to overcome these limitations. For example, integrated methodologies combining micro and macro approaches are being developed, emphasizing welfare practices that consider the interaction between individuals and social structures. This approach focuses on devising more effective solutions by considering the social, economic, and political context of an individual’s problems when understanding them. Furthermore, efforts are intensifying for social welfare professionals to actively participate in policy-making processes, ensuring that welfare policies reflect the voices from the field.
This article examined the developmental process of social welfare methodology. By reviewing the evolution of micro social welfare methodology, it became clear that relying solely on micro approaches inevitably has limitations in achieving the ideals of social welfare. Therefore, we can draw the lesson that it is desirable to develop micro and macro methodologies in a balanced manner. This is because solving social welfare problems requires not only clinical knowledge but also activities to formulate or improve social policies. Ultimately, only developing social welfare methodology that encompasses both micro and macro approaches will effectively advance and achieve the ideals of social welfare.
