The Critical Ecosocial Framework: A Constructivist Grounded Theory Integrating Anti-Racist, Anti-Oppressive, and Ecosocial Work Practice

Background and Purpose. Social Work has an ethical obligation to confront social injustices, notably racism and oppression, and environmental injustices. Yet, multilevel resistance persist within the profession and throughout broader society that hinder such work. By neglecting to integrate environmental justice and Anti-Racism and Anti-Oppression (ARAO) into practice, social work remains complicit in perpetuating cycles of oppression including white supremacy, colonialism, and speciesism. Presently, no research broadly examines the use of ARAO by ecosocial workers, while an ecosocial lens is missing within ARAO theory and practice.

Methods. Utilizing Constructivist Grounded Theory this study sought to fill these gaps by exploring the experiences and perspectives on the use of ARAO practices by ecosocial workers, as well as the individual and systematic barriers and facilitators to implementing such practices. Seventeen ecosocial workers (N=17) were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling. Participants completed a qualitative and quantitative background questionnaire including the Anti-Racist Behavior Inventory (ARBI), participated in Zoom/phone interviews or email questionnaires using the same standardized protocol, and engaged in theoretical sampling to enrich the emerging theory. Participants represented all U.S. regions, reflecting the diverse cultural and educational contexts in which ecosocial work and ARAO develop and occur. Roles included researchers (n=4), educators (n=4), policy/community practitioners (n=4), students (n=3), and clinical practitioners (n=2), with experience ranging from one to over twenty years. This diversity strengthens the emerging theory. Data analysis of the survey tool place via SPSS, while interview data was analyzed utilizing ATLAS.ti. To demonstrate the context from which the theory emerged, and to support a more robust theory, minimal comparison was facilitated between primary professional role, ARBI Institutional Advocacy subscale, and the emerging theoretical categories.

Results. Through an iterative and constant comparative process of coding and theoretical sampling, the Critical Ecosocial Framework emerged, offering a lens for understanding and addressing intersectional racial, social, and environmental injustices across all areas of practice. The five categories of the theory include: 1) Engaging in Continuous Reciprocal Learning and Growth; 2) Approaching Work with Intention and Authenticity ; 3) Respecting and Utilizing Interdependent Connections; 4) Navigating Challenges and Opportunities; and 5) Upholding an Integrated ARAO Ecosocial Practice. High ARBI scores affirm participants’ strong commitment to anti-racist practice. Minimal comparison indicated that all participants contributed almost equally to the core category of Upholding an Integrated ARAO Ecosocial Practice.

Conclusions and Implications. This study call for a fundamental reorientation of social work practice, policy, pedagogy, and research toward a more interdependent, equitable, and sustainable future. The Critical Ecosocial Framework highlights the significant role of groups and coalitions in addressing the mental health toll of social and environmental injustice and advancing social action, policy, and practice around these intersecting issues. Future research should examine the role of these groups and coalitions in addressing this intersection, as well as the application of the Critical Ecosocial Framework as a model for informing growth and action at both individual and systematic levels. Social workers should advocate for engagement in this work by others within both professional and personal contexts.