Decolonial Social Work: Moving Beyond Tokenism Toward Political Commitment

Abstract

This article critically examines the growing use of decolonial language in social work, warning against its reduction to symbolic inclusion and performative gestures. While institutions increasingly reference Indigenous knowledge and highlight “diversity” initiatives, these often mask the persistence of Eurocentric foundations and colonial power structures. The paper argues that true decoloniality in social work must be transformative—requiring deep political commitment, a restructuring of the hierarchy of knowledge traditions, and solidarity with oppressed communities. It critiques the neoliberal shaping of the profession, which prioritizes managerial neutrality and risk-focused practice over social justice and systemic change. Drawing from thinkers like Freire, Ahmed, Smith, and Mignolo, the article calls for a re-grounding of social work in praxis—combining critical reflection with active resistance. Indigenous philosophies such as Ubuntu and Buen Vivir should not be treated as decorative add-ons but as valid frameworks for organizing social work itself. The paper concludes by asserting that decolonization is not a metaphor or method, but a political project rooted in liberation. Social work must choose a side—not through branding, but by forging meaningful alliances and confronting injustice. This shift demands discomfort, humility, and a willingness to transform the profession from within.

Introduction

As critical conversations around decolonization proliferate across academic and professional domains, social work finds itself increasingly drawn into this dialogue. In many settings, decolonial rhetoric has become a buzzword, appearing in policy documents, university courses, and NGO mission statements. Yet, in much of this discourse, decolonization is rendered as surface-level rather than systemic, token gestures rather than transformative change. This paper argues that decoloniality in social work cannot be reduced to representational inclusion or epistemological lip service, but must involve a fundamental shift rooted in active political solidarity with marginalized peoples and a rupture with the neoliberal, colonial logics that shape mainstream practice.

The Tokenization of Decoloniality

Tokenism often manifests through symbolic gestures rather than substantive transformation. There is a tendency to showcase Indigenous or local epistemologies while leaving foundational Eurocentric structures untouched—for example, briefly mentioning Indigenous knowledge in curricula while continuing to rely on Western models for assessment and intervention.

Superficial acts focus on visibility without accountability. Institutions may highlight “inclusive” initiatives in promotional materials, while decision‑making authority and research agendas remain with elite, Western‑trained scholars. As Ahmed (2012) argues, the inclusion of marginalized voices can mask institutional inertia and protect the status quo.

Indigenous philosophies (e.g., Ubuntu, Buen Vivir, Guyub) are sometimes lifted out of context and embedded in toolkits without engagement with their ontological, spiritual, or ecological dimensions (Escobar, 2018), draining them of political substance and reducing them to symbols of diversity.

Tuck and Yang (2012) caution that when decolonization is reduced to a metaphor, it becomes a means of settler absorption rather than disruption. Performative gestures—such as land acknowledgments without reparations or case studies without Indigenous‑led pedagogy—preserve existing hierarchies.

Such tokenism can also sideline radical voices within Indigenous communities in favor of more “palatable” ones, neutralizing decolonial demands to fit bureaucratic norms.

Neoliberalism, Professionalism, and the Depoliticization of Social Work

Neoliberal agendas have reshaped social work into a bureaucratic, data‑driven discipline emphasizing personal deficits, risk control, and cost minimization (Ferguson & Lavalette, 2013; Moth et al., 2024; Muleya, 2020), rendering colonialism, racism, and capitalism invisible.

Professional social work often distances itself from activism in the name of objectivity. Yet, as Dominelli (2002) and Ife (2007) note, neutrality is itself political and aligns practice with state agendas, undermining efforts to confront structural injustice.

Education likewise incorporates colonial histories or cultural competency without examining the profession’s own colonial roots (Gray, Coates, & Yellow Bird, 2008), rarely equipping learners for engaged political practice alongside Indigenous and oppressed communities.

Toward Political Commitment: Decoloniality as Praxis

Following Freire (1970), decolonial social work should reunite theory with action, abandoning the myth of impartiality and embracing collaboration in systemic change.

Lorenz (2006) observes that European social work has operated within nationalistic and colonial frameworks. A decolonial stance aligns with struggles for Indigenous sovereignty, racial justice, and anti‑imperialist resistance—even when this requires opposing institutional mandates.

Mignolo and Walsh (2018) describe decoloniality as “delinking” from the colonial matrix of power and orienting toward pluriversal ways of knowing. In practice, this means privileging Ubuntu, Buen Vivir, Guyub, and other Indigenous cosmovisions as foundational frameworks for organizing social work.

Research systems—methods, ethics, peer review—often marginalize non‑Western knowledge. Decolonial practice entails building research groups grounded in Indigenous approaches and principles of self‑rule (Walter & Andersen, 2013).

Conclusion: Choosing a Side

Authentic decolonial practice should unsettle and challenge the norm. It requires more than tokenistic training or cosmetic changes; it demands a decisive break from colonial systems and a reorientation toward political struggle.

Decolonization is not a metaphor or tool but a political project of liberation. Social workers must interrogate not only practices but positions within power structures—embracing humility, discomfort, and the willingness to err in pursuit of justice.

As Freire (1970) reminds us, “Washing one’s hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.” The profession must take a definitive stance—and let its actions reflect that choice.

References

1. Ahmed, S. (2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. Duke University Press.
2. Dominelli, L. (2002). Anti-oppressive social work theory and practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
3. Escobar, A. (2018). Designs for the pluriverse: Radical interdependence, autonomy, and the making of worlds. Duke University Press.
4. Ferguson, I., & Lavalette, M. (2013). Crisis, austerity and the future(s) of social work in the UK. Critical and Radical Social Work, 1(1), 95–110. https://doi.org/10.1332/204986013X664960
5. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Herder and Herder.
6. Gray, M., Coates, J., & Yellow Bird, M. (2008). Indigenous social work around the world: Towards culturally relevant education and practice. Ashgate.
7. Ife, J. (2007). The new international agendas: What role for social work? International Social Work, 50(3), 393–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872807076049
8. Lorenz, W. (2006). Perspectives on European social work: From the birth of the nation state to the impact of globalisation. Barbara Budrich Publishers.
9. Mignolo, W. D. (2009). Epistemic disobedience, independent thought and decolonial freedom. Theory, Culture & Society, 26(7–8), 159–181.
10. Mignolo, W. D., & Walsh, C. E. (2018). On decoloniality: Concepts, analytics, praxis. Duke University Press.
11. Morley, C., Ablett, P., & Noble, C. (2021). The politics of social work: Transforming practice. Routledge.
12. Moth, R., Schilling, S., Neuhaus, L., Lavalette, M., & Mürner, B. (2024). Contesting neoliberal reform of statutory social work in Switzerland and England: Discretionary spaces, collective resistance and ethico-political professionalism. British Journal of Social Work. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcae122
13. Muleya, G. (2020). The fourfold neoliberal impact on social work: Marketisation, consumerisation, managerialisation and deprofessionalisation. Southern African Journal of Social Work and Social Development, 32(3), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.25159/2415-5829/6640
14. Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples (2nd ed.). Zed Books.
15. Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1(1), 1–40.
16. Walter, M., & Andersen, C. (2013). Indigenous statistics: A quantitative research methodology. Left Coast Press.
17. Yazdanpanah, L. K. (2021). Symbolic inclusion: The tokenization of diversity in Canadian social work education. Critical Social Work, 22(1), 2–18. https://doi.org/10.22329/csw.v22i1.6755