Sök artiklar i SveMed+

Observera: SveMed+ upphör att uppdateras!



Tradition eller vetenskaplig evidens? Om handlingsramen för ideella organisationers alkohol- och drogpreventiva arbete med ungdomar
Engelsk titel: Tradition or scientific evidence? What is the frame of action for voluntary organizations' alcohol and drug preventive work with young people? Läs online Författare: Von Grieff N Språk: Swe Antal referenser: 45 Dokumenttyp: Artikel UI-nummer: 04113311

Tidskrift

Nordisk Alkohol- & Narkotikatidskrift 2004;21(3)231-46 ISSN 1455-0725 E-ISSN 1458-6126 KIBs bestånd av denna tidskrift Denna tidskrift är expertgranskad (Peer-Reviewed)

Sammanfattning

Aim: The aim of this study is to discuss the frame of action within which the alcohol and drug prevention work by non-profit organizations in Sweden is performed. What activities or methods are emphasized as preventive work? How are the goals formulated? What kind of organizations are financed for preventive work? Concepts such as actors, legitimacy versus efficiency and technology are discussed. Data and Methods: The empirical material consists of project applications and evaluations from the 150 non-profit organizations that during 1998 and 1999 received financial support from the National Institute of Public Health for preventive alcohol and drug work among adolescents, and scattered data from projects applying for but not receiving funding. The data was analyzed by grouping the projects according to type of applying organization, goals of the project, measures and target group. Results: A great variety of organizations receive funds for preventive work. Some of them, the temperance organizations and church-related organizations, have traditionally a strong position in Swedish prevention work, albeit recently weakened. Others, such as sports organizations, do not have preventive work in this field as their prime activity. The explicit overall goal of all projects is to prevent alcohol and drug consumption among adolescents but the operational goals and activities vary a lot and not all of them are clearly alcohol or drug related. Preventive work seems to have quite undefined borders. 1/3 of the projects could not keep the time limits. This could be related to short time financing. Conclusions: In times when evaluation of social and health policy is emphasized, the relation between legitimacy and efficiency becomes central. The challenge will be to incorporate knowledge from the field in the creation of new and efficient tools and methods and to invite new organizations to take part in this work.