Implementing SPEC Policies and Practices in the Community

To implement SPEC policies and practices in the community, we need to be clear on what is it we wish to achieve. The following is a summary of the SPEC objectives

The Capability Domain: Strengths vs. Deficits

Recipients of services and community members have strengths. They learn to cope with difficult situations and develop resilience. Yet, certain practices and policies concentrate more on people's deficits than on people's strengths. A strength-based orientation helps identify and build on individual and community assets, resilience, and ability to thrive in difficult situations. This is opposed to focusing on individual and community deficits or diagnosing disorder.

The Temporal Domain: Prevention vs. Treatment

Primary prevention is about preventing problems before they occur. It means taking action to decrease the chances that a particular problem will affect a person, group, or an entire community. Prevention works by identifying and reducing risk factors and by identifying and promoting protective factors in individuals, families, and communities.

The Participation Domain: Empowerment vs. Disengagement

Participation and empowerment refer to community members having perceived and actual voice and choice in issues and decisions that affect their lives. In an empowering program, community members share decision-making power and control over resources with professionals. Empowerment programs aim to increase the power of individuals, groups, and entire communities.

The Ecological Domain: Changing Community Conditions vs. individuals

Some of the problems that individuals and entire communities face result from community and living conditions. Changing community conditions means addressing the root causes of the problems people and communities face. It also means creating new systems or structures that enhance citizen participation and wellbeing, removing barriers to services and supports, and promoting social policies that enhance wellbeing and people's ability to thrive.

Amelioration vs. Transformation

In order to implement SPEC policies and practices, it is important to make a distinction between ameliorative and transformative interventions.

Ameliorative interventions are those that aim to promote well-being.
Transformative interventions, while also concerned with the promotion of well-being, focus on changing power relationships and striving to eliminate oppression.

First-order change, amelioration, creates change within a system, while second-order change, transformation, strives to change the system and its assumptions. Ameliorative and transformative interventions can be contrasted along several dimensions, as is shown in the table below.

Distinguishing Characteristics of Ameliorative vs. Transformative SPEC Interventions

Characteristics	Ameliorative	Transformative
Framing of issues and problems	Issues and problems are framed as technical matters that can be resolved through rational-empirical problem-solving; power dynamics are ignored. Scientific problem-solving is in the foreground; power is in the background.	Issues and problems are framed in terms of oppression and inequities in power that require liberatory solutions, as well as research and problem-solving. Power, oppression, and liberation share the foreground with scientific problem-solving.
Values	Since issues and problems are framed in technical terms, the value emphasis of the intervention is often ignored. However, the values of holism, health, and caring and compassion are implicitly given the most emphasis. Values are in the background.	Values play a central role in the conceptualization of the intervention. While the values of holism, health, and caring and compassion may be present, greater emphasis is placed on the values of self-determination, participation, social justice, respect for diversity, and accountability to oppressed groups. Values are in the foreground.
Levels of analysis	Issues and problems are examined in terms of an ecological perspective that is attuned to multiple levels of analysis. However, interventions are often targeted at improving personal and relational well-being. Intervention at the personal and relational levels is in the foreground.	Issues and problems are examined in terms of power dynamics that are conceptualized as occurring at multiple levels of analysis. Intervention occurs at all levels of analysis, but there is concerted effort to improve collective well-being. The collective level of analysis is in the foreground, even for interventions at the personal and relational levels.
Prevention focus	Prevention is aimed primarily at the enhancement of protective factors, including skills, self-esteem, and support systems.	Prevention is aimed primarily at the reduction of systemic risk factors, including, racism, sexism, and poverty.
Desired outcomes	The primary desired outcome is enhanced well-being, which is conceptualized apolitically and narrowly at the individual level of analysis. Specific outcomes include: the promotion of individual well-being, which includes self-esteem, independence, and competence, the prevention of psychosocial problems in living, and the enhancement of social support. Outcomes at the individual level of analysis are in the foreground.	The primary desired outcomes is enhanced well-being, which is conceptualized in terms of power at multiple levels of analysis. Specific outcomes include: increased control, choice, self-esteem, competence, independence, political awareness, political rights and a positive identity, enhanced socially supportive relationships and participation in social, community, and political life, the acquisition of valued resources, such as employment, income, education, and housing, and freedom from abuse, violence, and exploitation. Outcomes at multiple levels of analysis that emphasize power-sharing and equity are in the foreground.
Intervention process	The intervention process may be "expert-driven," but usually involves collaboration with multiple stakeholders from the community.	The intervention process involves a partnership in which community psychologists work in solidarity with oppressed groups and possibly other stakeholders from the community. Conscientization, power-sharing, mutual learning, resistance, participation, supportive and egalitarian relationships, and resource mobilization are in the foreground of the intervention process.
Roles for community psychologists	Since issues and problems are framed as technical matters that can be resolved through rational-empirical problem-solving, the role of community psychologists is to lend their professional expertise to the community to solve problems. Program development and evaluation are emphasized. The professional expertise of the community psychologist is in the foreground, while the political role of the community psychologist is in the background.	Since issues and problems are framed in terms of oppression and inequities in power that require resistance and liberatory solutions, the role of community psychologists is to work in solidarity with oppressed groups to challenge the status quo and create social change. Social and political action is emphasized, along with program development and evaluation. The political role of the community psychologist shares the foreground with the professional role.

From Nelson, G., & Prilleltensky, I. (Eds.). (2005). Community Psychology: In Pursuit of Liberation and Well-Being. Palgrave.

Cycle of Praxis

In order to guide the process of change in organizations and communities, we have to be clear about values, social and cultural context, people's needs and strategic action. The table below describes a cycle of praxis whereby we address these four different points. Each one of the four elements of praxis addresses a specific set of questions and has a concrete outcome. When the outcomes of the four components come together, they create a powerful synergy. This is what we are after when we participate in settings for SPEC and social change. The cycle of praxis can be applied not only to social change, but to processes of organizational and community renewal as well.

Dimensions	State of Affairs	Subject of Study	Outcome
Vision and Values	What should be ideal vision? What values should guide our vision?	Social organizations that promote a balance among values for personal, relational, and collective well-being	Vision of justice, well-being and empowerment for oppressed communities
Cultural and Social Context	What is actual state of affairs?	Psychology of individual and collective as well as economy, history, society and culture	Identification of prevailing norms and social conditions oppressing minorities
Needs	How is state of affairs perceived and experienced?	Grounded theory and lived experience	Identification of needs of oppressed groups
Action	What can be done to change undesirable state of affairs?	Theories of personal and social change	Personal and social change strategies

Settings, Examples, and Roles for SPEC Agents

Agents of change can practice SPEC in a variety of organizations. Nelson and Prilleltensky (2005) offer three type of organizations where SPEC may be implemented.

Human Services

'Human services' is a generic term for organizations providing health, mental health, disability, housing, community, and child and family services, among others. These organizations can be: part of government; funded by government; funded by charities; or private agencies. Some human-service agencies receive funding from a combination of sources - government, charities and foundations. In the table below we see some examples of the various settings, along with possible roles for community psychologists.

Alternative Settings

Alternative settings are voluntary associations that are created and controlled by people who share a problem or an oppressive condition. Within alternative settings there is a strong emphasis on: creating a supportive community, non-hierarchical structures, holistic approaches to health, consensual decision making, horizontal organizational structures that promote participation and power-sharing, building on the strengths of diverse people who do not 'fit' into existing programs and advocacy for social change. Such settings are formed as an alternative to mainstream organizations that are not based on these same values and which often blame the victims for not adjusting to existing social conditions (Reinharz, 1984).

Settings for Social Change

Of all the settings where community psychologists can practise their trade, this is perhaps the most neglected and, at the same time, the most important area. On the continuum of transformation, this is the end where most profound change may be accomplished. SPEC agents have an opportunity to participate in social movements as organizers, consultants, researchers, and as citizens exercising their democratic rights to have a voice

Settings	Examples	Roles
Human Services	Community mental health agencies Independent living centres Department of community services Department of public health School board Child and family services	Program developer Program manager Program evaluator Human resources manager Health promoter Unit manager
Alternative settings	Women's shelters Community economic development corporation Resource centre for persons with HIV/AIDS Self-help group run by community members Immigrant and refugee advocacy centre	Social advocate Team leader Community developer Group facilitator Board member
Social change settings	Public interest research group Social policy institute Social change movements Trade and labour unions Political parties	Researcher Organizer Public speaker Policy developer Writer