Lethbridge, Jane ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0094-9967 (2026) Crises, uncertainty and risk: the role of democratic professionalism 2.0. In: Learning For Democracy, Democracy For Learning IV: International Conference. A.13. Which (Democratic) Professionalism in Neoliberal Times? Stream A. Democracy, Governance and Education Policy 4th International Conference of the journal Scuola Democratica, 1st - 4th September 2026, Rome, Italy. (Unpublished)

PDF (Author's Accepeted Conference Paper) 54378 LETHBRIDGE_Crises_Uncertainty_And_Risk_(AAM CONFERENCE PAPER)_2026.pdf - Accepted Version Restricted to Repository staff only Download (306kB) | Request a copy

Abstract

I wrote a book in 2019 ‘Democratic professionalism in public services’ which explored what it meant for public service professionals to act in a democratic way. I would like to take this opportunity to explore how three crises that have affected Britain since 2019 have impacted on the practice of democratic professionalism, using a framework of risk and uncertainty. Although writing in the late 20th century, Ulrich Beck was concerned with the “hidden emancipatory aspects of global risks” and “emancipatory catastrophism”. Zhang, Kong (2025) argue that resilience in a disaster can be improved by involving many stakeholders in the process of learning through crisis. This raises further questions about who defines the learning from a crisis, particularly which groups and how these groups resolve their differences. Muspratt-Palmer et al (2024) concluded that the process of learning is as important as the learning itself. This has implications for welfare professionals reacting to crises. As crises are characterised by uncertainty and risk, public professionals and services users must be able to come together in a shared learning process to facilitate a sense of emancipation. This will be essential for the formation of democratic professionalism. Professional expertise will have to undergo a transformation if democratic professionalism is to be embedded in public services during periods of crises. This new model can be called democratic professionalism 2.0. The COVID-19 pandemic features both as a major crisis and as a shadow where the learning has not yet been completed, as seen in the on-going COVID public inquiry. A second crisis, which had already begun by 2020, was how immigration has become a politically polarising issue, even with the creation of the Sanctuary movement in cities and schools, which generated forms of democratic professionalism. A third crisis, global heating/ heat stress, has emerged in the last few years but with increased intensity in the UK during 2026. New forms of democratic professionalism will be needed to address this crisis. The paper will conclude with an assessment of future opportunities for democratic professionalism 2.0.

Item Type:	Conference or Conference Paper (Paper)
Additional Information:	Stream/Panel A.13. Which (Democratic) Professionalism in Neoliberal Times? Stream A: Democracy, Governance and Education Policy. Convenor(s) Laura Cataldi (University of Salerno, Italy); Willem Tousijn (University of Turin); Fiorella Vinci (eCampus University). Keywords Democracy, Professionalism, Neoliberalism.
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Democratic professionalism, crises, risk, uncertainty
Subjects:	H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General) H Social Sciences > HD Industries. Land use. Labor > HD61 Risk Management J Political Science > JA Political science (General)
Faculty / School / Research Centre / Research Group:	Greenwich Business School Greenwich Business School > Centre for Research on Employment and Work (CREW) Greenwich Business School > School of Management and Marketing
Last Modified:	10 Sep 2026 09:06
URI:	https://gala.gre.ac.uk/id/eprint/54378

Actions (login required)

View Item

Downloads