By utilizing the concepts of field, habitus, and capital inherited from Bourdieu, this study explores publicness as a social practice. In doing this, the paper problematizes publicness concerning accountability and public value and empirically explores the organization of social support delivery in Istanbul. We posit our research question: In what manners does publicness open up a space for collaboration and convergence in relation to accountability? The data gathering and analysis follow a qualitative methodology. We found different forms of publicness under three different conditionalities: (1) publicness as political authority based on hierarchization and centralization; (2) publicness as competing positions produced by diverse actors and their diverse positions taken beyond hierarchical relations; (3) publicness as social inclusion and diversity that is all-embracing by employing more inclusive practices. Publicness relationally unfolds public value with and among formal rules, voluntary practices, and networks. By delving into constitutive elements of practice—symbolic capital and habitus—engaging in the field struggles of redefining and owning publicness, the paper goes beyond the conventional dichotomy of normative versus empirical conceptualizations of publicness and instead differentiates among distinct forms of publicness in different conditionalities and contributes to the literature by bridging publicness and accountability habitus.

中文翻译：

---

探索公共性作为社会实践：新兴经济体中的社会支持分析

本研究利用从布迪厄那里继承来的场域、惯习和资本的概念，探索公共性作为一种社会实践。在此过程中，本文提出了有关问责制和公共价值的公共性问题，并实证探索了伊斯坦布尔社会支持提供的组织。我们提出我们的研究问题：公共性如何为问责制方面的合作和融合开​​辟空间？数据收集和分析遵循定性方法。我们在三种不同的条件下发现了不同形式的公共性：（1）作为基于等级和集权的政治权威的公共性；(2) 公共性是不同行为者产生的竞争立场，以及他们超越等级关系的不同立场；(3) 公共性是通过采用更具包容性的做法来实现包容性的社会包容性和多样性。公共性通过正式规则、自愿实践和网络来相关地展现公共价值。通过深入研究实践的构成要素——符号资本和习惯——参与重新定义和拥有公共性的领域斗争，本文超越了公共性的规范性与经验性概念化的传统二分法，而是区分了不同条件下不同形式的公共性和通过弥合公共性和问责习惯为文献做出贡献。