<i>Networking Enforced</i>–<i>Comparing Social Services</i>'<i>Collaborative Rationales across Different Welfare Regimes</i>

Abstract

Abstract Collaboration and networking are ubiquitous , versatile features of social service provision in most Western countries. However , it is an open question whether networking means and entails the same across countries. Comparing regulatory frameworks in three jurisdictions representing distinctive ‘ worlds of welfare services ’ – Germany , Norway and Quebec – this article aims at eliciting the normative rationales that underpin and inform local service networks in child welfare and protection ( CWP ) systems. In Norway , where services are little diversified and largely insular , networking appears as a way of opening up for greater organizational plurality , within and beyond the public sector realm. In Germany in contrast , where services are highly pluralized and fragmented , networks are seen as an instrument for streamlining complexity. As for Quebec – an intermediate case in some respects – networking is envisioned as a catalyst for aligning two co‐existing service streams and mitigating the child protection – family support divide. Interestingly , in all three places , networking is now being enforced through similar highly formalized , top‐down regulatory provisions , even though the intended directions of change differ markedly. This has implications for CWP policy as well as research on networks at large.