...
首页> 外文期刊>Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research >Social science and policy: lessons of post-socialist reform
【24h】

Social science and policy: lessons of post-socialist reform

机译:社会科学与政策:后社会主义改革的教训

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Many scholars aspire to weigh in on issues of public policy and assume the position of a public intellectual who straddles the line between academic research and public discourse. Moreover, there is also an expectation, frequently expressed at scholarly presentations and in the discussion of candidates for academic jobs, that research should have clear policy implications. Given these desiderata, some scholars have identified the increasing specialization and division of the social sciences into disciplines and sub-disciplines as one reason for their failure to resonate beyond narrow circles. Hence, they have called for a radical restructuring of the social sciences and a breaking down of these disciplines, which they see as divided by boundaries that are more the product of historical decisions than functional demarcations. The purpose of this paper is to argue that the expectation of policy-relevance and engagement across the research-policy divide under the currently dominant economistic paradigm has potentially serious drawbacks. Hence, this contribution argues for a nonlinear approach to both the organization of social science research and to the conceptualization of action in it. It explores this argument by pointing to the marked failures of policy advising in the context of theorizing about post-socialist economic and political development. Furthermore, it describes a way of reconceptualizing action in social scientific analysis that is more open ended and views society as a complex system affected by nonlinear dynamics.View full textDownload full textKeywordssocial sciences, new paradigms, network-oriented model of research coordinationRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2012.655573
机译:许多学者渴望权衡公共政策问题,并担任跨越学术研究和公共话语之间界限的公共知识分子的立场。此外,人们也期望在研究报告和学术候选人的讨论中经常表达对研究的明确政策含义。鉴于这些绝望,一些学者已经将社会科学的专业化和划分化到学科和子学科的不断增长,这是他们未能在狭窄的圈子内引起共鸣的原因之一。因此,他们呼吁对社会科学进行彻底的重组,并打破这些学科。他们认为,这些学科被界限所划分,而界限更是历史决策的产物,而不是功能划分。本文的目的是论证,在当前占主导地位的经济学范式下,跨越研究-政策鸿沟的政策相关性和参与度的期望具有潜在的严重弊端。因此,这一贡献为社会科学研究的组织以及其中的行动的概念化提出了一种非线性方法。它通过指出在后社会主义经济和政治发展理论化的背景下政策咨询的明显失败来探讨这一论点。此外,它描述了一种在社会科学分析中重新概念化行动的方式,这种方式更加开放,并将社会视为受非线性动力学影响的复杂系统。查看全文下载全文关键词社会科学,新范式,面向网络的研究协调模型相关var addthis_config = {ui_cobrand:“ Taylor&Francis Online”,servicescompact:“ citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,更多”,发布:“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2012.655573

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号