The ecosocial paradigm in social work : Striving for planetary well-being

This is a sel -a chi ed e sion o an o iginal a icle. This e sion may di e om he o iginal in pagina ion and ypog aphic de ails. Au ho (s): Ti le: Yea : Ve sion: Copy igh : Righ s: Righ s u l: Please ci e he o iginal e sion: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ The ecosocial pa adigm in social wo k : S i ing o plane a y well-being © 2024 selec ion and edi o ial ma e , Me ja Elo, Jonne Hy önen, Sanna Ka kuleh o, Teea Ko e mäki, Janne S. Ko iaho, Mikael Puu inen, and Miikka Salo; indi idual chap e s, he con ibu o s Published e sion S amm, Ingo; Ran a-Ty kkö, Sa u; Ma hies, Aila-Leena; Nä hi, Ka i S amm, I., Ran a-Ty kkö, S., Ma hies, A.-L., & Nä hi, K. (2024). The ecosocial pa adigm in social wo k : S i ing o plane a y well-being. In M. Elo, J. Hy önen, S. Ka kuleh o, T. Ko e mäki, J. S. Ko iaho, M. Puu inen, & M. Salo (Eds.), In e disciplina y Pe spec i es on Plane a y Well-Being (pp. 177-188). Rou ledge. h ps://doi.o g/10.4324/9781003334002-18 2024 In oduc ion The chap e ocuses on he plane a y well-being concep om he pe spec i e o socialwo kandiss uc u edin ou mainpa s.Fi s ,wewillb ie lyin oducesocial wo k as a p ac ice-o ien ed p o ession and academic discipline ha has many di e - en o ms globally. Second, we will desc ibe he new pa adigm o ecosocial wo k. Ecosocial wo k a emp s o eadjus he p o essions´ main emphasis on social p ob- lems o and be ween human beings o a posi ion ha pu s humani y’s dependence on he na u al en i onmen a i s cen e. Thi d, we will examine how he plane a y well-being concep can be a ui ul addi ion o ecosocial wo k concep s and social wo k in gene al. He e we will ocus on he implica ions o he plane a y well-being concep o social wo k e hics. We a gue ha social wo k, as a human-cen ed p o- ession and discipline, mus s ike a balance be ween c i ical an h opocen ic and non-an h opocen icpe spec i es.In he ou hand inalpa ,wediscussc i ically wha e hical dilemmas could a ise i he idea o plane a y well-being would be ully implemen ed in social wo k p ac ice. In conclusion, we iden i y plane a y well-being as a use ul addi ion o cu en discussions in social wo k. Social wo k as an academic discipline and a p ac ice-o ien ed p o ession Social wo k simul aneously e e s o many hings: An academic discipline, a esea ch- based, p ac ice-o ien ed p o ession combined wi h a ela ed se ice sys em, as well as social mo emen s commi ed o he enhancemen o human well-being. The g oups andindi iduals ha socialwo k ocusesonandcollabo a eswi ha eo eniden i ied as ulne able, opp essed, o li ing in po e y. In hei own ways, om he p emise 13 THE ECOSOCIAL PARADIGM IN SOCIAL WORK S i ing o plane a y well-being Ingo S amm, Sa u Ran a-Ty kkö, Aila-Leena Ma hies and Ka i Nä hi DOI: 10.4324/9781003334002-18 178 Ingo S amm e al. o collec i e esponsibili y, he di e en b anches o social wo k aspi e o p omo e social change, social cohesion, and empowe men . While many o he p o essions and disciplines sha e simila ideals o social jus ice, he s ong ounda ion in an e hi- cal and mo al discou se is a dis inc i e ea u e o social wo k (In e na ional Fede a- ion o Social Wo ke s (IFSW), 2018; Wi kin, 2003, p. 239). Wi h o igins in he p ac ices o bo h s a e and eligion-based o ms o o gan- ized ca e and suppo o hose in need, social wo k has i s oo s in philan h opic wo k, communi y-o ganizing, and social mo emen s. As an academic discipline, howe e , social wo k has only been o med globally o e he las 50 yea s, wi h signi ican  di e ences be ween coun ies. Du ing his ime, i  has seen a long de elopmen o p o essionaliza ionandanex ensiono i s ieldso ac ionand esponsibili ies. Al hough an academic discipline in i s own igh , social wo k has in e aces wi h many o he disciplines, such as psychology o social and public policy, and i employs heo e ical and me hodological inpu s om o he social and beha iou alsciences.Whilesocialwo khasalsobeeniden i iedaspa o social mo emen s o as olun a y wo k, globally he end has been a g adual p o es- sionaliza ion o social wo k p ac ice and academiciza ion o social wo k educa- ion. Especially in he No dic wel a e s a es such as Finland, social wo k is closely en wined wi h he public sys em o wel a e se ices. As a p o ession, social wo k has i s own e hical s anda ds, mani es ed in in e - na ionalandna ionalsocialwo kcodeso e hics.Acco ding o heglobalde ini- ion o he social wo k p o ession (IFSW and In e na ional Associa ion o Schools o Social Wo k (IASSW), 2014), he p inciples o social jus ice, human igh s, collec i e esponsibili y, and espec o di e si ies a e cen al o social wo k. On a gene al le el, social wo ke s coope a e wi h people in a emp s o sol e social p oblems and p o ide suppo o indi iduals and communi ies, ideally p omo - ing social change on a s uc u al and poli ical le el. Wha e e he s a us and local o ganiza ional s uc u es, social wo k is expec ed o encompass communi y wo k, heal h ca e se ices, and poli ical p ocesses o g ea e equali y and inclusi eness o socie ies (e.g., Ran a-Ty kkö, 2010, p. 307). Howe e , in he se ice in as uc- u es o mode n wel a e s a es, social wo ke s a e mainly di ec ed o wo k a he mic o le el wi h indi idual se ice-use s, and less on he communi y le el. The ecosocial pa adigm in social wo k The acknowledgemen o he impo ance o he physical en i onmen in social wo k can be aced back o i s ea ly beginnings as a p o ession and discipline (Nä hi and Ma hies, 2016; S amm, 2021b; S aub-Be nasconi, 1989). Du ing ha ime, in he la e 19 h cen u y, u ban o buil en i onmen s s a ed o be a conce n o he o e unne s o oday’s social wo ke s. This included, among o he issues, ques ions ega ding ai and wa e quali y, was e emo al, sani a ion, and heal hy ood (e.g., Wa is, 2016). In he USA, hese ea ly, en i onmen ally awa e social wo ke s, among hem Jane Addams, o en had s ong links o he Chicago School The ecosocial pa adigm in social wo k 179 o Sociology and especially u ban sociology. They analyzed he li ing condi ions o (mig an ) wo ke s in ci ies and de eloped me hods and in e en ions o ackle p oblems o he u ban en i onmen in coope a ion wi h he inhabi an s. These me hods and in e en ions led o a g adual imp o emen in he li ing condi ions o he u ban poo in indus ialized coun ies. Howe e , a e Wo ld Wa II, in he globally hegemonic wes e n social wo k, no ions o he en i onmen na owed o pe cei ing i p ima ily as social, cul u al, and economic, bu excluding o a g ea e ex en any connec ion o he na u al en i onmen (Nä hi and Ma hies, 2016). Ecosocial wo k, o e lapping wi h concep s such as en i onmen al, ecological, o g een social wo k, is buil on he p emise ha humans a e pa o , and depend- en on, he web o li e on Ea h. Hence, he human esponsibili y is o sa egua d, and a a minimum no o e ly ha m, he delica e balance o ecosys ems and o he complex in e connec ed sys ems ha li e on Ea h depends on. Thus, ecosocial wo k has been c i ically ques ioning he g ow h-based economic ounda ion o he exis ing wel a e s a es and social wo k (Ma hies, 2001). Fo he ime being, concu en ecologicalc ises,whicha echie lycausedbyex ac i is o e con- sump ion o na u al esou ces, pa icula ly by o e consuming popula ion g oups and economic sec o s globally, endange he con inui y o many li e o ms, and in helong unhumani yi sel .While hisalonechallenges hee hicaljus i ica ion and meaning ulness o ex ac i is ela ionships wi h “na u e” (Pihls öm, 2020), i con adic s social wo k’s mission o p o ec hose who a e ulne able, ma - ginalized, o in po e y. Ra he , he en i onmen al c ises bo h deepen and cause new o ms o ulne abili y and ma ginaliza ion (Ran a-Ty kkö and Nä hi, 2021). Fu he mo e, social wo k mus deal wi h he possible nega i e consequences o en i onmen al policies, such as ising ene gy po e y, o ma ginalized and ul- ne able g oups. Ecosocial wo k s i es o con ibu e o a p o ound and ai sus ainabili y ansi- ion, as well as he widesp ead adop ion o an ecosocial pa adigm in social wo k and socie ies a la ge (Ma hies and Nä hi, 2017). The e o e, ecosocial wo k aspi es o a deepe and ans o ma i e app oach o sus ainabili y in social wo k p ac ice, including a c i ical e alua ion o i s own iews o he wo ld and subsequen econ- igu a iono  heplaceo humanswi hin hena u alwo ld(Boe oe al., 2020). The clima e c isis and o he li e- h ea ening plane a y scale en i onmen al changes illus a e ha humanbeingsneed o undamen ally econ igu e hei  ela ionship o plane Ea h and i s li e o ms. Howe e , o mode n social wo k, which s ems la gely om he same an h opocen ic and mode nis wo ld iew as he cu en en i onmen al p oblems, his p esen s a pa adigma ic, and hus immense on ologi- cal, ins i u ional, and p ac ical challenge. None heless, while s ill a om main- s eamandno widelyiden i iedwi hin hesocialwo kp o ession, ecogni iono  and in e es in ecosocial wo k has apidly g own du ing he pas wo decades as a esea ch a ea and heo e ical de elopmen , ha ing an inc easing impac on educa- ion and p ac ice de elopmen s (ibid.; K ings e al., 2018; Ma hies, K ings and S amm, 2020; Ran a-Ty kkö and Nä hi, 2021). 180 Ingo S amm e al. The ecosocial amewo k has much in common wi h he c i ical, s uc u al, indigenous,and eminis app oachesin he ieldo socialwo k,allo whichca y a b oad unde s anding o he pe son-in-en i onmen concep and an in e es in he dynamics o powe (Coa es, 2003; Coa es and G ay, 2012; Nä hi and Ma hies, 2016). Mo eo e , hey a e linked wi h and con ibu e o cu en ly e ol ing, in e - disciplina y discussions on pos -an h opocen ic and pos human (e.g., Bozalek and Pease, 2021), as well as decolonizing social wo k (Cla ke and Yellow Bi d, 2021). Recognizing ha e en global change is made locally, he ask o ecosocial wo k is o pu sue a a ie y o locally meaning ul pa hways owa ds g ea e sus ainabili y. In doing so, one o i s p io i ies is o ensu e ha social wo k clien s, and in gene al people wi h lesse esou ces and poli ical and economic powe , ha e bo h access o and a say o e sus ainable choices and li es yles. In o he wo ds, sus ainabili y and en i onmen al jus ice can be conside ed as pa allel and aligned p inciples o social wo k, oge he wi h human igh s and social jus ice (see also I e, 2018). No wi h- s anding he clea need o a comp ehensi e sys emic enewal, ecosocial wo k has he e o o e p oceeded mos ly om wi hin exis ing sys ems. O en, ecosocial wo k has mean p omo ing o down igh o ganizing niches o ai e and mo e sus ainable e e yday p ac ices, income ea ning possibili ies, ela ionships, and well-being. Ecosocialwo kiden i iesonap ac icalle el, i s ,as onglinkbe weensocial and en i onmen al p oblems, because ma ginalized g oups o en su e om bo h en i onmen al and social injus ice. Second, ega ding solu ions, he ecoso- cial amewo k b ings he social and he en i onmen al dimension oge he . This means, among o he hings, ha na u e can be seen as a esou ce ha could be ( e)disco e ed by social wo ke s, o example, by ecognizing and u ilizing he healing powe o he na u al en i onmen and animal companions, such as in a i- ous o ms o na u e and/o animal-assis ed ca e. Mo eo e , a ious ac i i ies ha e been o ganized, o example, a ound e- and upcycling, o p o ide bo h sus ainable income oppo uni ies and o p omo e esou ce-spa ing ways o li e. Thi d, ecoso- cial wo k in ol es an obliga ion o social wo ke s, oge he wi h hei clien s, o con ibu e o mo e sus ainable socie ies, which can mean conside ing plane a y well-being as a new goal o he p o ession (c ., S amm, 2021a). This p oposed obli- ga ioncanbeiden i iedindependen o  hesocialwo kapp oach.I canplaya ole in indi idual, clinical social wo k, in g oup-based o communi y app oaches bu also in s uc u al o poli ical social wo k aspi ing o change a socie al and policy le els (Boe o, 2017; Nä hi and Ma hies, 2018). Plane a y well-being and i s ela ionship wi h he ecosocial pa adigm in social wo k As a goal, plane a y well-being o e laps in nume ous ways wi h he objec i es o ecosocial wo k. Emphasizing he in eg i y o he Ea h sys em and ecosys em p ocesses as he ounda ion o li e, i b ings oge he bo h social, humanis ic, and na u al scien i ic knowledge. In line wi h he concep  o  plane a y well-being The ecosocial pa adigm in social wo k 181 (Ko e mäki e al., 2021), p oponen s o ecosocial wo k o en s ipula e a shi om an an h opocen ic wo ld iew o an ecocen ic (o simply ecosocial) one (c ., G ay and Coa es, 2012; Powe s and Rinkel, 2019; Ramba ee, Powe s and Smi h, 2019). Social wo k u he elies hea ily on needs heo ies and emphasizes hei con- nec ions o human igh s and social jus ice. The ocus on sys ems and p ocesses, inhe en in he plane a y well-being concep as a p econdi ion o he sa is ac ion o needs, is also amilia o social wo k (e.g., Holls ein-B inkmann and S aub- Be nasconi, 2005). Howe e , he ocus usually emains on he indi idual pe son, and sys ems a e o en used o desc ibe a ious aspec s o he social en i onmen o a social wo k clien , such as he amily sys em, he wo k li e sys em o he cul u al o eligious sys em ha a pe son is embedded in. Finally, he plane a y well-being app oach add esses he p oblem o global inequali y, which is an impo an issue o social wo k globally. Howe e , o he ime being, social wo k is la gely s uck in na ional amewo ks ha do no suppo and ins ead ac ually hinde global iews and p oblem-sol ing (Ran a-Ty kkö, 2017, p. 115). The o e lap be ween he concep o plane a y well-being and he ecosocial pa - adigm in social wo k is al eady mani es ed in he concep o well-being. The e m ishighligh edin hecu en globalde ini iono  hesocialwo kp o ession.Thelas  sen ence o his global ocal poin o social wo ke s s a es: “Unde pinned by heo- ies o social wo k, social sciences, humani ies and Indigenous knowledge, social wo k engages people and s uc u es o add ess li e challenges and enhance well- being” (IFSW and IASSW, 2014). As wi h he e m en i onmen , in social wo k he no ion o well-being is mos ly unde s ood as human well-being, emphasizing human needs (Gamble, 2012). Howe e , based on he assump ion ha well-being is a undamen ally impo an concep o social wo k, many schola s and ad oca es o he ecosocial pa adigm ha e made a emp s o u he de elop he unde s and- ing o well-being in social wo k (Pee e s, 2016; Powe s, Rinkel and Kuma , 2021). Pee e s, o example, a gues ha in imes o he ecological c isis he idea ha well- being ollows om high ma e ial p ospe i y mus be e ised. The emphasis should be on he quali y o human ela ionships and he ela ionship wi h na u e (Pee e s, 2016, p. 178). O he schola s sugges he in oduc ion o concep s such as holis ic o mu ual well-being, o “ ue well-being o he Web o Li e” (Powe s, Rinkel and Kuma , 2021, p. 5). To s i e o holis ic well-being in social wo k would mean o shi owa ds a non-an h opocen ic, o ecocen ic wo ld iew (c ., Ramba ee, Pow- e s and Smi h, 2019). The guiding p inciple o such a wo ld iew would be eco- logical jus ice, which seeks o p ese e he in eg i y o he na u al wo ld, among o he hings, and asc ibes o nonhuman na u e an in insic alue i espec i e o i s alue o human beings (G ay e al., 2013, p. 321). The unde lying e hical p inciple is he equali y o all li ing beings (S e ba, 2014). The concep o en i onmen al jus ice can be seen as subo dina ed o an h opo- cen ic because i adhe es o a human pe spec i e, emphasizing dis ibu ional, ep- esen a ional, and p ocedu al jus ice (c ., Ki imaa e al., 2021; Schlosbe g, 2007). En i onmen al jus ice is a concep s ongly connec ed o he US-Ame ican con ex , 182 Ingo S amm e al. whe e i o igina ed in he Black ci il igh s mo emen . La e , i also inco po a ed o he ma ginalized g oups ha aced bo h acism and en i onmen al haza ds a he same ime (K ings and Copic, 2020). In he con ex o he clima e c isis, en i- onmen al jus ice has been inco po a ed in o he concep o clima e jus ice. Gi en ha he di e en e ec s o global wa ming on di e en coun ies and peoples a e well documen ed, clima e jus ice poin s o imbalances in bea ing he b un o he clima e c isis bo h wi hin and be ween na ion s a es. Globally, people li ing in po e y a e commonly a ec ed mo e ha shly by he changing clima e, wi h he impac o ex eme wea he condi ions, such as hea wa eso  loods,aswellasbyclima echangemi iga ionmeasu es,suchasinc eas- ing ene gy cos s. In social wo k, inc easing numbe s o schola s insis on aking hese e ec s mo e se iously and in eg a ing hem in assessmen s and he me hods o social wo k p ac i ione s. Bo h p inciples, en i onmen al and ecological jus ice, ollow he same di ec ion bu simul aneously de ia e in some ega ds. Bo h go beyond he adi ional no ions o social jus ice in social wo k, which do no con- side ela ions o he na u al en i onmen , and bo h asc ibe an in insic alue o he na u al wo ld. Combined wi h he p inciple o sus ainabili y, en i onmen al jus ice mus also be widened (as in e gene a ional jus ice) o accommoda e he needs and igh s o u u e people (S amm, 2021b). In summa y, he concep o plane a y well-being and he ecosocial pa adigm in social wo k sha e a lo o common g ound. This includes a holis ic iew on well- being, which goes beyond human needs and seeks o achie e ecological jus ice. A leas in heo y, also global inequali ies a e highligh ed in bo h app oaches. The ques iono whoseneedsshouldbe ul illedindi idually oabolishinequali ies among humans, while a he same ime conside ing he well-being o o he o ms o li e, emains open. These dilemmas a e pa ly discussed in he nex sec ion. Challenges in applying he plane a y well-being concep in social wo k To apply he plane a y well-being concep in social wo k would mean o econ- side social wo k e hics. In global social wo k s a emen s on e hics, as well as in na ional codes o e hics in gene al, human igh s and social jus ice a e laid down as he main p inciples. In p ac ice, howe e , much o he e hical delibe a ion ocuses on wo ke –clien ela ions in an implici ly na ional con ex (Ran a-Ty kkö, 2017). Theplane a ywell-beingconcep ,as hemo especi icecosocialpa adigm,would s ipula e o go beyond hese adi ional p inciples and alues o social wo k, and o build b idges o he na u al en i onmen and ecognize i s alue o social wo k. In en i onmen al e hics, which he plane a y well-being concep is pa ly based on, hese wope spec i esa eiden i iedasan h opocen icandnon-an h opocen ic e hics (Boylan, 2014; Ligh and Rols on, 2003). Fo social wo k, as a human- cen ed p o ession and discipline, s iking a balance be ween he (mo al) an h opo- cen ic and he non-an h opocen ic pe spec i es seems c ucial. The ecosocial pa adigm in social wo k 183 S e ba (2014) a gues ha a econcilia ion be ween an h opocen ic and non- an h opocen ic e hics is possible. His line o easoning is o alue also o social wo k and i s connec ion o he plane a y well-being concep . As a s a ing poin , he acknowledges he in insic alue o all species bu he a gues ha in ce ain ci - cums ances he alue o human beings, o in o he wo ds he well-being o humans, can be p io i ized. He in oduces h ee p inciples ha could be seen as common g ound be ween he wo desc ibed e hical pe spec i es, allowing a econcilia ion be ween bo h: 1 A P inciple o Human De ence: Ac ions ha de end onesel and o he human beings agains ha m ul agg ession a e pe missible e en when hey necessi a e killingo ha minganimalso plan s(S e ba,2014,pp.164‒166). 2 A P inciple o Human P ese a ion: Ac ions ha a e necessa y o mee ing one’s basic needs o he basic needs o o he human beings a e pe missible e en when hey equi e agg essing agains he basic needs o animals and plan s (ibid.). 3 A P inciple o Disp opo ionali y: Ac ions ha mee nonbasic o luxu y needs o humans a e p ohibi ed when hey agg ess agains he basic needs o animals and plan s (ibid.). E en hough his a gumen a ion is challenged by o he en i onmen al e hics schol- a s (c ., S e e son, 2014), i can se e as a s a ing poin o a e ised social wo k e hic ha would s ill ocus on human well-being bu acknowledge he in insic alue o he na u al wo ld as well. Rega ding he hi d p inciple, he e has been a ela ed deba e in social wo k heo y (S aub-Be nasconi, 2018). Apa om he needs o animals and plan s, an impo an ques ion is wha basic and luxu y needs a e. In social wo k his di e ence has also been discussed using he e ms needs e sus wishes (ibid.). Some schola s oppose he idea o any objec i e needs. I e, o example, sugges s ha needs a e “by hei e y na u e, alue-laden” (I e, 2012, p. 126). They depend, acco ding o I e, o a g ea ex en on indi idual iews o he clien s o social wo k as well as on he alues o social wo ke s hemsel es. Wi h- ou ha ing he space o elabo a e he heo e ical ounda ions and s andpoin s o he deba e he e, i could be concluded based on S e ba’s a gumen a ion ha social wo k would, in he u u e, no only ha e o di e en ia e be ween basic and luxu y needs o humans bu would ha e o conside he needs o he na u al wo ld as well (whe e only basic needs exis ). No ably, in he plane a y well-being amewo k, only basic needs a e e e ed o as needs. Taking he posi ion ha he needs o he na u al wo ld could be allowed o be subo dina ed only i basic human needs a e a s ake could pa e he way o a c i i- cal an h opocen ism in social wo k (G unwald, 2016). The ask o econcilia ion be ween (mo al) an h opocen ic and non-an h opocen ic e hics can also be used o linking en i onmen al and ecological jus ice. On a gene al le el, bo h concep - pai s sha e a common g ound. We a gue ha o social wo k heo y and social wo k e hics a be e unde s anding o hese concep s and hei o e lap is needed. 184 Ingo S amm e al. This could hen se e as a basis o discussions on he conc e e implica ions o he plane a y well-being concep o social wo k. The implica ions o challenges o social wo k p ac ice a e mani old. Fi s , i mus be s a ed ha social wo ke s ake ac ion based on ce ain manda es. T adi- ionally, he common unde s anding was ha o a double manda e be ween suppo and con ol: One by he s a e, which was associa ed wi h he e m con ol, and he second one coming om he clien s, which ep esen ed suppo . Social wo ke s in his espec had o balance and handle ensions be ween he wo asks—suppo ing and con olling. Swiss social wo k schola , S aub-Be nasconi, has added a hi d manda e o hese. She a gues o a sel -gi en, p o essional manda e ha is based on bo hsocialwo k´sscien i icknowledgebaseandane hical ounda ion.Thela e  consis s mainly o social wo k’s main p inciples o human igh s and social jus ice and is b oadly laid down in in e na ional and na ional e hic s a emen s and codes (S aub-Be nasconi, 2016, 2018). In ecen yea s, an ex ension o adjus men o he hi d manda e, o include he na u al en i onmen and sus ainabili y goals, has been sugges ed (S amm, 2021b). Howe e , a di ec manda e om plan s o animals can- no be gi en. All h ee manda es migh only implici ly include a conside a ion o he in insic alue o he nonhuman na u e. To da e, howe e , his componen has been a ely discussed. While some social wo k codes o e hics al eady men ion en i onmen al jus ice asap inciple, heconcep assuchisle unde inedandwi hou ope a ionalizing o  social wo k p ac ice. This makes i ha d o social wo ke s in he cu en si ua ion o know wha hey could o should do in ega d o en i onmen al jus ice o p o- mo ing he well-being o nonhuman na u e. Mo eo e , as hey a e ained o con- side human well-being, knowledge abou o he species o he na u al en i onmen is usually no pa o hei educa ion. When some social wo ke s o social wo k o ganiza ions none heless pay a en ion o he na u al en i onmen , he easoning behind his is usually ha i is in eg al o he social en i onmen o he clien s. The abo e no wi hs anding, many social wo ke s, p o essional and non-p o essional, a e e y likely o be conce ned wi h he well-being o nonhuman na u e bu lack knowledge o how o ake i in o accoun and p omo e i in hei own wo k (Ran a- Ty kkö and Nä hi, 2021). Pa o a classical social wo k diagnosis is an assessmen phase, in which a p oblemisiden i ied oge he wi h heclien s.Suchanassessmen canha edi e - en componen s, such as looking a he needs, igh s, and esou ces o clien s (c ., A negge , 2005). Based on he assessmen , gene ally ce ain goals a e se , linked wi h me hods o achie e hem. In indi idualized o ms o social wo k, he na u al en i onmen migh play a ole, bu only when i comes o en i onmen al haza ds o ameni ies. This can mean a combined o m o social and en i onmen al o ecologi- cal jus ice om he pe spec i e o indi idual p oblems. Rega ding he abo e-men ioned p inciple o disp opo ionali y, in mos cases he needs o social wo k clien s can be conside ed basic needs. Howe e , he implemen a ion o he plane a y well-being concep migh be mo e likely o be