"Men vart leder ett lokalt tiggeriförbud i Vellinge?" : En fallstudie om hur tiggeri konstrueras i debatten om tiggeriförbud.
(2020) SOPA63 20192School of Social Work
- Abstract
- But what will be the result of a local ban on begging in Vellinge? : A case study on the construction of begging in the debate regarding a criminalization of begging.
The aim of this study was to investigate the social construction of begging in the public debate regarding the criminalization of begging in Vellinge municipality in Sweden. A total of 34 documents concerning Vellinge municipality were analyzed. The documents were mostly composed of local newspaper articles, but also included some court verdicts and a local political decision. This study has a social constructive approach and the theoretical framework is composed by Accounts theory. In the findings we see that very few individuals have a neutral stance in the debate,... (More) - But what will be the result of a local ban on begging in Vellinge? : A case study on the construction of begging in the debate regarding a criminalization of begging.
The aim of this study was to investigate the social construction of begging in the public debate regarding the criminalization of begging in Vellinge municipality in Sweden. A total of 34 documents concerning Vellinge municipality were analyzed. The documents were mostly composed of local newspaper articles, but also included some court verdicts and a local political decision. This study has a social constructive approach and the theoretical framework is composed by Accounts theory. In the findings we see that very few individuals have a neutral stance in the debate, rather the actors’ descriptions showed two significantly different sides of the question. Two positions regarding the criminalization of begging in Vellinge were found; pro and against. These two positions create two different perspectives on begging, which in turn have an impact on who is considered affected by begging and how the problem should be resolved. The perspective that promotes a ban presents measures aimed to ease the situation for Vellinge and the residents. On the other hand, the perspective that opposes a ban of begging states measures to improve the situation of the beggars. We also found that actors within the different perspectives have polarized positions and they blame each other of norm deviation. The study also demonstrates that actors in the debate use varied ways of excusing and/or justifying their position pro and against the criminalization of begging. (Less) - Popular Abstract (Swedish)
- Studien ämnar att undersöka hur tiggeri konstrueras som ett socialt problem och vilka problemkonstruktioner som är framträdande i debatten om tiggeriförbud i Vellinge kommun, samt vilka faktorer som får betydelse i aktörers argument för sina respektive positioner i debatten. Studien är en kvalitativ dokumentanalys av 34 dokument, där myndighetsbeslut, domar och tidningsartiklar som alla rör tiggeriförbudet i Vellinge kommun har analyserats. Studien utgår ifrån en socialkonstruktionistisk ansats, där Jönsons (2010) perspektivansats använts både som metod och teori. Även Scott och Lymans (1968) teori om Accounts används som teori i analysen. I debatten om tiggeriförbud i Vellinge har två problemperspektiv identifierats, att vara för ett... (More)
- Studien ämnar att undersöka hur tiggeri konstrueras som ett socialt problem och vilka problemkonstruktioner som är framträdande i debatten om tiggeriförbud i Vellinge kommun, samt vilka faktorer som får betydelse i aktörers argument för sina respektive positioner i debatten. Studien är en kvalitativ dokumentanalys av 34 dokument, där myndighetsbeslut, domar och tidningsartiklar som alla rör tiggeriförbudet i Vellinge kommun har analyserats. Studien utgår ifrån en socialkonstruktionistisk ansats, där Jönsons (2010) perspektivansats använts både som metod och teori. Även Scott och Lymans (1968) teori om Accounts används som teori i analysen. I debatten om tiggeriförbud i Vellinge har två problemperspektiv identifierats, att vara för ett tiggeriförbud och att vara mot ett tiggeriförbud. Aktörerna inom de två problemperspektiven konstruerar tiggeri på olika sätt, de ger skilda beskrivningar av vem som anses berörd av tiggeri och hur tiggeri ska bemötas. Aktörer inom problemperspektivet som förespråkar ett tiggeriförbud beskriver tiggeri som störande och föreslår lösningar som har för avsikt att lindra kommuninvånarnas situation, medan aktörer inom det problemperspektiv som är mot ett tiggeriförbud anser att tiggeri inte kan anses vara en ordningsstörning och föreslår lösningar som har för avsikt att lindra situationen för människorna som tigger. Av studiens resultat framgår även att aktörer inom respektive problemperspektiv anklagar varandra för att begå normöverträdande handlingar. När en aktör blir anklagad för att begå en normöverträdande handling har vi kunnat se att aktörer i debatten om tiggeriförbud hänvisar till samhälleliga värden och normer för att ursäkta eller rättfärdiga sin egen eller andras handlingar. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9002158
- author
- Svärdh, Liza LU and Strömberg, Louise LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- SOPA63 20192
- year
- 2020
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Beg, begging, tiggeri, social construction, accounts, moraliska redovisningar, problem perspective, problemkonstruktion
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9002158
- date added to LUP
- 2020-01-27 15:49:22
- date last changed
- 2020-01-27 15:49:22
@misc{9002158,
abstract = {{But what will be the result of a local ban on begging in Vellinge? : A case study on the construction of begging in the debate regarding a criminalization of begging.
The aim of this study was to investigate the social construction of begging in the public debate regarding the criminalization of begging in Vellinge municipality in Sweden. A total of 34 documents concerning Vellinge municipality were analyzed. The documents were mostly composed of local newspaper articles, but also included some court verdicts and a local political decision. This study has a social constructive approach and the theoretical framework is composed by Accounts theory. In the findings we see that very few individuals have a neutral stance in the debate, rather the actors’ descriptions showed two significantly different sides of the question. Two positions regarding the criminalization of begging in Vellinge were found; pro and against. These two positions create two different perspectives on begging, which in turn have an impact on who is considered affected by begging and how the problem should be resolved. The perspective that promotes a ban presents measures aimed to ease the situation for Vellinge and the residents. On the other hand, the perspective that opposes a ban of begging states measures to improve the situation of the beggars. We also found that actors within the different perspectives have polarized positions and they blame each other of norm deviation. The study also demonstrates that actors in the debate use varied ways of excusing and/or justifying their position pro and against the criminalization of begging.}},
author = {{Svärdh, Liza and Strömberg, Louise}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{"Men vart leder ett lokalt tiggeriförbud i Vellinge?" : En fallstudie om hur tiggeri konstrueras i debatten om tiggeriförbud.}},
year = {{2020}},
}