Changing Nature of Formal Service Program Volunteering
Most other chapters in this Handbook focus on volunteering in associations, but this chapter focuses instead mainly on volunteering in volunteer service programs (VSPs). As discussed at length in Handbook Chapter 15, VSPs are essentially volunteer departments of other, larger, controlling, parent organizations, such as nonprofit agencies or government agencies.
Where the member volunteers of voluntary associations have great collective power, electing their top leaders, the volunteers in a VSP have little or no power in the VSP or in their larger, parent organization, and do not elect the top leaders of their VSP or their parent organization. This marked structural difference in authority and power structure has major implications for volunteers and the volunteering experience in these two distinct kinds of volunteering settings (see Smith 2015a, 2015b).
Volunteering encompasses individual and social dimensions: it is a practice that involves an investment made by the individual to contribute to other people outside one’s household, and often to the more general, collective welfare.
KeywordsCorporate Social Responsibility Civil Society Voluntary Association Voluntary Sector Civic Participation
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Barkay, Tamar. 2011. “Employee Volunteering: Soul, Body and CSR.” Social Responsibility Journal 8(1):5–5Google Scholar
- Beck, Ulrich. 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage PublicationsGoogle Scholar
- Beck, Ulrich, and Elisabeth Beck-Gernsheim. 1996. “Individualization and ‘Precarious Freedoms’: Perspectives and Controversies of a Subject-Orientated Sociology.” Pp. 23–48 in Detraditionalization, edited by P. Heelas, S. Lash, and P. Morris. Oxford, UK: BlackwellGoogle Scholar
- Bory, Anne. 2013. “Le bénévolat d’entreprise en France: Une rencontre du privé et du public sous influences étasuniennes” [The Benevolence of French Businesses: An Encounter of the Private and Public]. Travail et emploi 1:53–62Google Scholar
- Eliasoph, Nina. 2011. Making Volunteers: Civic Life After Welfare’s End. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
- Handy, Femida, Ram A. Cnaan, Lesley Hustinx, Chulhee Kang, Jeffrey L. Brudney, Debbie Haski-Leventhal, Kirsten Holmes, Lucas Meijs, Anne B. Pessi, Bhagyashree Ranade, Naoto Yamauchi, and Sinisa Zrinscak. 2010. “A Cross-Cultural Examination of Student Volunteering: Is It All About Résumé Building?” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 39(3):498–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hustinx, Lesley, Femida Handy, and Ram A. Cnaan. 2010. “Volunteering.” Pp. 73–89 in Third Sector Research, edited by R. Taylor. New York: SpringerGoogle Scholar
- Hustinx, Lesley, Els De Waele, and Chloé Delcour. 2015. “Hybridisation in a Corporatist Third Sector Regime: Paradoxes of ‘Responsibilised Autonomy’.” Voluntary Sector Review 3(2):115–134Google Scholar
- Jacoby, Barbara, and Associates. 2003. Building Partnerships for Service Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-BassGoogle Scholar
- Jakob, Gisela. 1993. Zwischen Dienst und Zelbstbezug [Between Service and Self-Centeredness: A Biographical-Analytical Study]. Opladen, Germany: Leske BudrichGoogle Scholar
- Krinsky, John. 2007. Free Labor: Workfare and the Contested Language of Neoliberalism. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
- Leigh, Robert, David H. Smith, Cornelia Giesing, Maria José Leon, Debbie Haski-Leventhal, Benjamin J. Lough, Jacob M. Mati, and Sabine Strassburg. 2011. 2011 State of the World’s Volunteerism Report: Universal Values for Global Well-Being. Bonn, Germany: United Nations VolunteersGoogle Scholar
- Meijs, Lucas. C.P.M., and Jeffrey L. Brudney. 2007. “Winning Volunteer Scenarios: The Soul of a New Machine.” International Journal of Volunteer Administration XXIV(6): 68–79Google Scholar
- Meijs, Lucas C.P.M., and Esther Hoogstad. 2001 “New Ways of Managing Volunteers: Combining Membership Management and Programme Management.” Voluntaty Action 3(3):41–61Google Scholar
- Meinhard, Agnes, Femida Handy, and Itay Greenspan. 2010. “Corporate Participation in the Social Economy: Employer-Supported Volunteering Programs.” Pp. 245–266 in Researching the Social Economy, edited by L. Mook, J. Quarter, and S. Ryan. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto PressGoogle Scholar
- Musick, Marc A., and John Wilson. 2008. Volunteers: A Social Profile. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University PressGoogle Scholar
- Pearce, Jone L. 1993. Volunteers: The Organizational Behavior of Unpaid Workers. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
- Putnam, Robert D. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & SchusterGoogle Scholar
- Rose, Nikolas. 1999. Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
- Simonet, Maud. 2010. Le travail bénévole: engagement citoyen ou travail gratuit? [Volunteer Work: Citizen Engagement or Free Labor?] Paris: La DisputeGoogle Scholar
- Simonet, Maud, and John Krinsky. 2012. “Safeguarding Private Value in Public Space: Neoliberalizing Public Service Work in New York City’s Parks.” Social Justice 38(1–2):28-47.Google Scholar
- Smith, David H. 2014. “The Current State of Civil Society and Volunteering in the World, the USA, and China.” China Nonprofit Review (English edition), 6(1):137–150Google Scholar
- Smith, David H. 2015a. “Voluntary Associations, Sociology of.” Pp. 252–260 in International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edition, Vol. 25, edited by J. D. Wright, Editor-in-Chief. Oxford, UK: ElsevierGoogle Scholar
- Smith, David H. 2015b. “Voluntary Organizations.” Pp. 261–267 in International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edition, Vol. 25, edited by J. D. Wright, Editor-in-Chief. Oxford, UK: ElsevierGoogle Scholar
- Smith, David H. 2016. “The History of Volunteer Service Programs: A Quiet Revolution in the Nonprofit Voluntary Sector.” Chestnut Hill, MA: Department of Sociology. Unpublished paper under editorial reviewGoogle Scholar
- Wuthnow, Robert. 1998. Loose Connections: Joining Together in America’s Fragmented Communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar