The study addresses how government procurement mechanisms shape social work practices in community-based rehabilitation projects for non-local drug users in China. Drawing on institutional ethnography, the study examines how administrative directives, performance evaluation, and standardized documentation affect frontline social workers’ professional roles. Findings reveal that social work has transformed into a form of “administrative social work,” where social workers prioritize compliance over client-centered care. The study highlights tensions between institutional mandates and professional autonomy. This research contributes to understanding the role of institutional governance and the power of textually mediated practices in shaping professional social work.
BisaillonL (2012) An analytic glossary to social inquiry using institutional and political activist ethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Methods11(5): 607–627.
2.
BraunVClarkeV (2022) Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis. Qualitative Psychology9(1): 3–26.
3.
CampbellMGregorF (2002) Mapping Social Relations: A Primer in Doing Institutional Ethnography. Toronto, ON, Canada: Garamond Press.
4.
ChanCKLeiJ (2017) Contracting social services in China: The case of the Integrated Family Services Centre in Guangzhou. International Social Work60(6): 1343–1357.
5.
DeVaultM (2006) Introduction: What is institutional ethnography?Social Problems53(3): 294–298.
6.
EllingsenGMonteiroERøedK (2013) Integration as interdependent workaround. International Journal of Medical Informatics83(5): e161–e169.
7.
Enjuto MartinezRQuYHowellJ (2023) Government contracting services to social organisations in China: A review of research for future enquiry. Social Policy and Society22(4): 615–635.
8.
EvansT (2010) Professional Discretion in Welfare Services: Beyond Street-Level Bureaucracy. Farnham: Ashgate.
9.
FanY (2013) The opportunities and challenges to the professional social work agencies under the background of “the double subjects policy” of government to buy social public services. Social Work5: 13–20 (in Chinese).
10.
HeXLiuL (2021) Government’s purchase of services and the standardization of social work: A case study of three social work organizations in Shanghai. Journal of East China Normal University (Humanities and Social Sciences)2: 127–136 (in Chinese).
11.
HowellJ (2019) NGOs and civil society: The politics of crafting a civic welfare infrastructure in the Hu-Wen period. The China Quarterly237: 58–81.
12.
HuangXWChangHHTangWHA (2016) Carework in the division of labor of gender and professionalism: An institutional ethnography of teachers’ assistants in special education in Taiwan. Journal of Women’s and Gender Studies39(12): 1–58.
13.
HuangMHLiuJL (2022) Practice outcomes, problems and countermeasures of social work services for non-local registered drug rehabilitation clients in Guangzhou. China Social Work5(Part II): 38–40 (in Chinese).
14.
HuangXXXiongHL (2018) The dilemma of social service in the context of transitional governance in China: The case study of social work service in Z City. Chinese Journal of Sociology38(4): 133–159 (in Chinese).
15.
JingY (2012) From stewards to agents? Intergovernmental management of public-nonprofit partnerships in China. Public Performance & Management Review36(2): 230–252.
16.
JingY (2018) Dual identity and social organizations’ participation in contracting in Shanghai. Journal of Contemporary China27(110): 180–192.
17.
JingYHuY (2017) From service contracting to collaborative governance: Evolution of government–nonprofit relations. Public Administration and Development37(3): 191–202.
18.
LeiJCaiTChanCK (2022) Contractual controls and pragmatic professionalism: A qualitative study on contracting social services in China. Critical Social Policy43(1): 97–118.
19.
LiX (2018) The myth of community technical governance: The dilemma of government project management and social services. Journal of Lanzhou University (Social Sciences)46(3): 33–39 (in Chinese).
20.
LinW (2017) The development of community-based service for older people in urban China: A case study in Guangzhou city. International Social Work60(6): 1606–1618.
21.
LipskyM (1980) Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
22.
LiuLJWangEJ (2021) The dilemma of government purchasing social work service projects under the dual governance logic. Social Construction8(3): 73–84 (in Chinese).
23.
McGibbonEPeterEGallopR (2010) An institutional ethnography of nurses’ stress. Qualitative Health Research20(10): 1353–1378.
24.
MunroE (2011) The Munro Review of Child Protection: Final Report—A Child-Centred System. London: The Stationery Office.
25.
PonnertLSvenssonK (2015) Standardisation—The end of professional discretion?European Journal of Social Work19(3–4): 586–599.
26.
ProdingerBTurnerSM (2013) Using institutional ethnography to explore how social policies infiltrate into daily life. Journal of Occupational Science20(4): 357–369.
27.
SmithDE (1987) The Everyday World as Problematic: A Feminist Sociology. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
28.
SmithDE (2005) Institutional Ethnography: A Sociology for People. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
29.
SmithDE (2006) Introduction. In: SmithDCampbellMDeVaultMetal. (eds) Institutional Ethnography as Practice. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 1–11.
30.
TownsendE (1996) Institutional ethnography: A method for showing how the context shapes practice. The Occupational Therapy Journal of Research16(3): 179–199.
31.
TownsendELangilleLRipleyD (2003) Professional tensions in client-centered practice: Using institutional ethnography to generate understanding and transformation. American Journal of Occupational Therapy57(1): 17–28.
32.
WalbyK (2007) On the social relations of research: A critical assessment of institutional ethnography. Qualitative Inquiry13(7): 1008–1030.
33.
WangQ (2017) Project system and the dilemma of social service supply: Based on public and social service outsourcing. Chinese Public Administration4: 59–65 (in Chinese).
34.
WangWNSnapeH (2018) Government service purchasing from social organizations in China: An overview of the development of a powerful trend. Nonprofit Policy Forum9(1): 1–10.
35.
WenJHeW (2016) The phenomenon of “selective service” in social work and its reflection. Study and Exploration7: 38–45.
36.
ZhangRLiuSBaoL (2020) The dilemmas and optimization of social organizations participation in government purchase of public services—An analysis based on system field framework. Chinese Public Administration2: 94–101 (in Chinese).
37.
ZhengGHZhangRS (2021) Localization of values: Reflections on the development of social work in China in the past 30 years. China Studies2: 203–219 (in Chinese).
38.
ZhuJGChenA (2013) The embeddedness of professional social work into the power relations of urban community: A case study of government service purchase. Sociological Studies1: 1–20 (in Chinese).
