Mellan idéburen välfärd och evidens: En breddad syn på kunskap

Abstract

Previous research supports the notion that the distinctiveness, diversity, and freedom of choice characterizing nonprofit initiatives are somewhat at odds with a scientific and professional logic as expressed in evidence-based prac-tice (EBP) and knowledge-based management. In the long term, this potenti-ally threatens public funding for nonprofit welfare. This article combines this research with new epistemological analyses of how science is operationali-zed in some of EBP’s central techniques, such as randomized controlled tri-als and guidelines. In such analyses, it becomes clear that the contradiction between the distinctive nature of the nonprofit sector and a scientific logic is based on certain ”universalist” assumptions that are not necessary. By introducing alternative perspectives on causality, validity, and objectivity, the article proposes a broader view of scientific rigor and EBP that aligns better with the ”particularist” distinctiveness of the nonprofit sector. According to this analysis, nonprofit welfare represents a view of knowledge and quality that has the potential to enhance welfare operations regardless of their orga-nizational structure, post-EBP.