This paper explores the origin, evolution, and interdisciplinary applications of the concept of counter-hegemony. The development is examined, from its theoretical origins in Antonio Gramsci’s work, through Lefebvre’s conceptualization, to newest contributions, such as Lave’s. Gramsci does not use the term “counter-hegemony”, but we elaborate how he introduces its basic idea. Building on this foundation, the paper traces how the concept of counter-hegemony has evolved across anthropology, sociology, pedagogy, to our own field of interest: Transformative learning. Central to this development are Lefebvre’s conceptualization of (dis-)alienation and his idea of a dialectic of utopian revolutionary praxis. Jean Lave draws on both Gramsci and Lefebvre to explore how counter-hegemonic practices emerge through everyday learning across levels of practice.

Drawing on critical psychological practice research, situated generalization, and positive critique through co-production of prototypes (Nissen), we conceptualize how counter-hegemonic alternatives can be a critique of hegemonic practices co-produced with participants, who are positioned as part of hegemonic practice.

The paper traces how counter-hegemonic frameworks have been applied across different fields of practice, such as social movements, digital media cultures, and our own fields of alternative learning practices. By unfolding our learning trajectories that lead to the engagement into counter-hegemonic alternatives, the paper offers a praxis- theoretical based perspective on how hegemonic narratives of power and ideology can be challenged. Ultimately, it is discussed how counter-hegemony alternatives serve as a vital concept for understanding and enabling transformative change in both theory and practice, and we thereby address the political engagement of dialectical relational praxis theory.

This paper reflects upon alternatives of social youth work in marginalized residential urban areas in Denmark conceptualized through dialectical relational practice theories of counter hegemony alternatives (Gramsci; Lave; Mørck; Nissen) and (dis)alienation (Lefevre). In what ways can ‘alternative’ and/or ‘transformative’ practices be understood across (historical) social youth work practices and contexts? How do we - across boundary-positions as insider and outsiders of alternative youth work - understand “alternative” “transformative” social youth work? How can relational dialectical theoretical conceptualizations help us enhance the ways in which we investigate and analyze alternative, transformative social youth work? What implications does our theoretical conceptualization have for the struggles, recognition, and for the dilemmas the possibilities of transformative change across levels of practice?

Empirically the paper builds on interviews with social youth work professionals and our common decades of lived experience co-researching and co-producing alternatives of youth work. As researchers and experienced co-research practitioners our lived experiences differ across positions: from voluntary or marginal youth positions to longtime employed social workers, to leader positions within alternative social work practice, to experienced (co-)researchers within the field. About half of the interviewed participants have a history of participating as co-researchers in different practice research projects with one of us researchers. Building on our different multiple positionality and research histories as both ‘insiders’ and ‘outsider’ of social work practice and research, we will investigate the historical developments, struggles and change of alternative social youth work between 2000 and 2025, in Odense and Copenhagen, two major cities of Denmark, with different histories of social and youth politics.

This paper explores how co-production in boundary youth work—involving young people, youth workers, and local communities—can foster inclusive communities and shape the life and learning trajectories of potentially marginalized youth in Danish urban residential areas. The analysis is informed by dialectical relational practice theories of counter-hegemonic alternatives (Gramsci; Lave; Mørck; Nissen), alongside the concepts of collective transformative agency (Stetsenko) and differential social spaces (Lefebvre). Empirically, the paper draws on a vignette from a youth meeting within a mentor program co-developed with young people to address a local issue: children’s limited participation in clubs and sports activities. The mentors, engaged in the local youth club, facilitate activities and build bridges to leisure opportunities—forming both a learning environment and a part-time job. The vignette serves as a prism through which to analyze the contradictory conditions across levels of practices within this initiative marked by struggles over legitimacy showing how the program, despite challenging circumstances evolved agency through differential social spaces. Following the mentors reveals multiple motivations for participation, helping children, making a difference, learning, belonging, and expanding future opportunities—combining economic incentives with community engagement, friendship, and meaning-making. The initiative constitutes a “third space”—neither conventional leisure nor formal education—where flexible participation and collective transformative agency emerge through co-production and community engagement. The paper discusses how counter-hegemonic youth work, grounded in community-building and enacted across multiple levels of practice, can transcend alienation, foster collective agency, and reshape both shared and individual life conditions.