Scaling up Utopias: E.O. Wright and the Search for Economic Alternatives

For over fifty years, successive waves of critique have underscored that the apolitical character of much of political science research betrays the founding mission of the discipline to have science serve democracy. The Caucus for a New Political Science was originally based on such a critique, and the perestroika movement in the discipline included a call for more problem-driven as opposed to theory- or method-driven work that would better connect political science research to ongoing political struggles. In recent years, movements for a public sociology and public anthropology as well as dissonant movements in economics and related fields have added to the insistence that social science research was too often disconnected from the real world. Phronetic social science has emerged out of the ferment for change in the social sciences, starting with the much-debated book by Bent Flyvbjerg, Making Social Science Matter (Cambridge, 2001). Flyvbjerg critiqued the social sciences for mimicking the natural sciences, while proposing an alternative approach that focuses research on helping people address the problems they are facing. Today, phronetic social science goes beyond the call for an alternative approach to social inquiry and its growing adherents are providing evidence that this alternative approach to doing research can enrich the social sciences by more effectively connecting research to efforts to address real world problems as people experience them. This article provides a genealogy of efforts to connect political science to politics, a review of the major critiques of mainstream research, an explication of the rationale for more problem-driven, mixed-methods research, a specification of the key principles of the phronetic approach, and examples of its application in the public realm. The article concludes with implications for realizing a more political political science by way of taking a phronetic approach.     

Nordic Social Science Research and the American Nightmare

The purpose of the article is to review four major social science research projects currently under way in the Nordic countries, and to discuss the preconditions for, and the significance of, the manner in which the projects are organised. Four models for organising social science research are outlined, and applied to the projects. The main conclusion of the study, albeit of a tentative nature, is that whether a research project is organised according to one or other model is dependent upon the infrastructure of social science research, and the organisation of the wider society in the country concerned.     

Public Administration Scholarship and the Politics of Coproducing Academic–Practitioner Research

Developing greater cooperation between researchers and practitioners is a long‐standing concern in social science. Academics and practitioners working together to coproduce research offers a number of potential gains for public administration scholarship, but it also raises some dilemmas. The benefits include bringing local knowledge to bear on the field, making better informed policy, and putting research to better use. However, coproduction of research also involves managing ambiguous loyalties, reconciling different interests, and negotiating competing goals. The authors reflect on their experience of coproducing a research project in the United Kingdom and discuss the challenges that coproducers of research confront. They situate the discussion within a consideration of traditions of public administration scholarship and debates about the role of the academy to understand better the politics of their joint practice. Thinking about the politics of coproduction is timely and enables the authors to become more attuned to the benefits and constraints of this mode of research..     

Consulting critics: A new role for academic policy analysts

It is by now widely accepted that social science research has only an indirect and general impact on public policymaking. Academic social science research, it is often argued, is antithetical to policy research: the former is animated by traditional scientific canons while the latter is specific and problem-oriented. Moreover, modern bureaucracies are now understood as political environments within which pure research will be routinely ignored if it does not serve someone's interests. For these and other reasons, social scientists are being encouraged either to eschew policy research or not to expect much influence. This article provides an alternative model of social scientists in the policy process, as consulting critics reviewing, analyzing and commenting upon substantive policy research. This model holds benefits for both scholars and clients, turns the canons of scientific inquiry into assets instead of liabilities, and responds to some of the concerns recently raised in the literature concerning the role of social science in the policy process.     

Welfare Reform and Models of Public Policy: Why Policy Sciences Are Required

Policy could be studied on the basis of three different models: ideological, social science, and policy sciences. Policy in accordance with ideology may not necessarily rely on solid rigorous research to back it up. Policy made solely in accordance with a rigorous social science model might be able to demonstrate a causal relationship between a given policy and desired outcomes, and in the process establish a clear role for good research in the policy process. But it often fails to account for the larger social and political context in which policy is formulated. Good policy should be based on rigorous social science research, while also factoring in the values of the broader society, that is, ideology. This would imply that in order to bridge the gap, that good policy should be formulated in accordance with the policy sciences model because it connects the rigorous methodology of the social sciences with the larger social policy context, that is, the broader policy process. When analyzing the reform of 1996 within the framework of these models, it becomes clear that while the legislation is highly ideological, it is not based on any serious research that would satisfy the criteria of the social science model. It fails the policy sciences model, in part, because its absence of clearly defined objectives, or a single objective, makes the task of measurement difficult. On the contrary, this legislation is a good example of why the policy community would do better to rely more on the policy sciences.     

Political Science: A Look at the Discipline from a Postgraduate Perspective

Research has become increasingly important within social science since the introduction of the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE). The RAE has served to simultaneously focus the attention of academic institutions upon research output and emphasise the obvious penalties of poor performance in this area in terms of potentially lower academic status, lower income and lower student numbers. Academic institutions have, therefore, begun to pay an increasing amount of attention to postgraduate research and the needs of postgraduates. This article questions the extent to which institutions are actually meeting these needs and reviews the extent to which institutions reap the potential benefits that employment of postgraduates can bring.     

Rationalist and Constructivist Perspectives on Reputation

This article argues for a new and broader understanding of reputation as a generally shared belief concerning a referent's character or nature, based on a range of information, associations and social cues. This is in place of the conventional rationalist definition of this concept as the degree to which an actor reliably upholds its commitments, based on a record of past behaviour. A brief literature review shows that this concept is crucial in underpinning a wide range of work in political science and economics premised on strategic interaction. The difference between a rationalist and constructivist understanding of reputation hinges on three points. Firstly, reputation is argued to be a relational concept rather than a property concept. Secondly, reputation is a social fact with an emergent, intersubjective quality, not just a collection of individual beliefs. Thirdly, rather than being an inductively derived objective record of past behaviour, reputation is based on associations, feelings and social cues. The last section of the article applies this broader conceptual understanding to two empirical examples: the importance of international organisations' reputation for their influence over policy-makers, and the way in which small states are classified as tax havens by a reputation test.     

公共管理视角下的中国危机管理研究——现状、趋势和未来方向

中国近年来社会科学视角的危机管理研究已进入瓶颈期。本文旨在梳理这十年来公共管理视角下的危机管理相关研究,以期为危机管理研究进一步深入发展提供参考。评述文献主要来源于公共管理、政治学、管理学和综合社会科学领域的重要学术期刊以及依据专业知识所选取的近些年来具有代表性的研究专著和报告。在对文献进行分类、编码和统计分析之后,分析结果表明:危机事前分析的文章占据主导地位,而对危机应对过程和危机后分析相对不足;应然研究类文章占据很大比重,但对于危机理论的建构和实证检验的研究比较缺乏;对于危机的综合分析多于单灾种分析。近些年中,虽然上述研究方式依然居于主导地位,但是研究者开始关注危机后的分析,注意理论的建构和检验,特别值得注意的是对于社会安全事件的分析呈上升趋势。最后,本文结合危机管理研究的现状和趋势总结出未来值得研究的若干领域。     

The Big (Data) Bang: Policy,Prospects, and Challenges

Big data is increasingly the cornerstone on which policy making is based. However, with potential benefits and applications come challenges and dilemmas. In this set of symposium articles, authors examine the promise and problems of big data, exploring associated prospects, risks, parameters, and payoffs from a variety of perspectives. The articles address myriad challenges in the handling of big data sets, such as collection, validation, integrity, and security; ontological issues attending data analytics and conceptual transformations; the foundations of big data collection for social science research; the gap between the acquisition of data and its use to advance discovery and innovation; the costs and benefits of using big data in decision making and analysis; and, finally, related problems of privacy, security, and ethics. Issues such as these will continue to arise with increased use of big data as fundamental to policy making and governance in today's growing information society.     

Choices for Chinese Political Science: Methodological Positivism or Methodological Pluralism?

Like its American counterpart, Chinese political science is experiencing a similar concern regarding its societal relevance as it attempts to assess and focus on China’s unique political and social concerns. Should Chinese political science tread the same path? Should it pursue a purely methodological positivist approach or should it engage in a more holistic and methodologically pluralistic approach such as that found in public administration? A mixed-methods approach, which includes both problem-driven research and theory-driven research, might be a better way to serve both the discipline and China.     

社会服务领域政策理论构建初探

社会服务体系建设包括众多议题,我们不能仅仅考虑政策法规层面和实践层面的建设,更要重视理论层面的建设,只有这样,社会服务体系建设才算完整。需要强调的是,社会服务领域不仅需要一般科学研究提出的社会科学理论和自然科学理论,更需要用于指导社会服务政策和实践、定位于政策的理论,即政策理论。本着这一目的,本文就社会服务领域理论的政策用途、如何构建和构建什么样的政策理论进行初步探索。     

POLICY RESEARCH AS SOCIAL SCIENCE: OUTFLANKING THE VALUE DILEMMA

Social scientists fear that policy research compromises their objectivity. As a result, policy science is becoming a separate discipline which is accorded lower status that other fields of social inquiry. However, the history, sociology and psychology of science show that the elaboration of robust social theory would be aided by a more intimate relation between policy research and academic social science than currently obtains. The traditional canons of value freedom, which have been invoked to justify the independence of social science from policy, misrepresent the relation between facts and values in science. Objective knowledge is consequent on dispute and triangulation by a many-valued community of fallible social scientists; but it does not eventuate from consensual value neutralism. Social knowledge interacts with social values to change phenomena our theories represent. This self-restructuring characteristic of social events warrants singular attention by social scientists. Policy researchers are in a particularly opportune position to provide that attention.     

A doctoral program in the policy sciences

The complex nature of policy problems requires innovative approaches to problem analysis and a new social science interdiscipline focused on policy processes. The Policy Science Program at SUNY Buffalo is designed to advance this field and to train hybrid Ph.D.'s as research-scientists/practitioners. These new policy science professionals will augment policymaking organizations as policy analysts, evaluation researchers, knowledge brokers, research feedback disseminators, process monitors, and consultants. Their training must include research methodology, analytic approaches, orienting conceptual schemes from systems theory, social sciences, and specific problem domains, and operating skills. The curriculum includes both academic and field-training aspects.Though the program is oriented toward the applied sciences, it is an attempt to mold a version of the new combination of revised social science paradigms and analytic approaches identified by Dror as the Policy Sciences.     

Inequity in the distribution of science and technology outcomes: a conceptual model

We propose a conceptual model to encourage systematic analysis of social equity issues of science policy. The model considers the relationships among several attributes of science and technology goods and services including the incidence of its impact, degree of concentration, and whether its consumption generates capacity for the individual or groups or is “hedonic,” that is, short term and diminishing rapidly in its effects. We discuss the implications of the model in terms of four quite different types of equity. We conclude by suggesting some respects in which the model could be employed to facilitate public policy and moral deliberations about the effects of science and technology.     

社会实验与自然科学实验的方法论比较

实验是科学研究的基本方法.本文试从科学方法论角度,对自然科学实验和社会实验进行比较研究,探讨社会实验与自然科学实验的深层衔接点和无法通约之处,以加深对社会实验及其方法论的理解.     

INNOVATION POLICY AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCES

This paper offers a rationale for expanding current efforts to support industrial innovation to encompass the important and unique contributions that the social sciences can make in this area. In order to provide a comprehensive overview of these contributions, the paper examines the role that social factors play in the process of technological innovations, the importance of social innovations, and the potential contributions of social science research to the diffusion of innovation as well as its importance in considering the broad social impacts of social innovations.     

Paths between Positivism and Interpretivism: An Appraisal of Hay's Via Media

Hay's Political Analysis raises foundational issues for all social scientists, not least in its outline for a via media , or middle way, between positivist and interpretivist social science. In this view, social science should be firmly grounded in empirical study but take seriously the notion that there is no privileged vantage point from which to generate dispassionate knowledge claims about the social world. This article asks whether this apparent via media is coherent and meaningfully captures what it means to be doing positivist and interpretivist social science without, so to speak, conceding too much ground to the other approach.     

Reimagining race and gender in public administration and public policy: Insights from an interdisciplinary systematic review

Public administration scholarship on race and gender is motivated by normative concerns about social equity, and dominated by work on bureaucracy and its representativeness. Despite decades of research on race and gender in public administration, there has been limited engagement with racializing and gendering processes. Relatedly, scant attention is paid to other disciplines that center on race and gender in theorizing. The purpose of this review is to explore public administration scholarship on race and gender in the context of allied social science disciplines, reveal limits of current approaches in public administration, and articulate strategies for enhancing understanding of race and gender in public administration scholarship. We use bibliometric and content analysis methods to map the intellectual structure of social science scholarship on race and gender, highlight public administration's place in this structure, and compare public administration scholarship on race and gender with other social science disciplines.     

Ethics and the unintended consequences of social research: A perspective from the sociology of science

It is argued that successful social science requires the development of a social ethic or sense of research responsibility. An examination of impediments to ethical reflection in sociology suggests that an individualistic orientation is ineffective in coping with the unintended consequences of social research. Such consequences can be particularly harmful in the sociology of science where policy research and governmental support for its production often entails an indiscriminate advocacy of knowledge. Such advocacy raises anew questions of the power of scientific knowledge, the definition of client-professional relationships, and the collection of data which may not only violate the intent of individuals and groups supplying information, but may undermine the credibility of sociology itself.An early version of this paper was presented at the Sixth Annual Alpha Kappa Delta Sociological Research Symposium, Richmond, Virginia, February 19–21, 1976.