共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 46 毫秒
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The wandering thought of Hannah Arendt. Hans‐Jörg Sigwart. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016 Rightlessness in an age of rights. Hannah Arendt and the contemporary struggles of migrants. Ayten Gündoğdu. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015 下载免费PDF全文
Johan van der Walt 《群星:国际评论与民主理论杂志》2018,25(2):304-308
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Tina Nabatchi Alessandro Sancino Mariafrancesca Sicilia 《Public administration review》2017,77(5):766-776
Despite an international resurgence of interest in coproduction, confusion about the concept remains. This article attempts to make sense of the disparate literature and clarify the concept of coproduction in public administration. Based on some definitional distinctions and considerations about who is involved in coproduction, when in the service cycle it occurs, and what is generated in the process, the article offers and develops a typology of coproduction that includes three levels (individual, group, collective) and four phases (commissioning, design, delivery, assessment). The levels, phases, and typology as a whole are illustrated with several examples. The article concludes with a discussion of implications for research and practice. 相似文献
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
On the basis of the Afrocentric perspective, this article uses South Africa as a test case to critique Mokoko Piet Sebola's piece titled “Peer review, scholarship and editors of scientific publications: the death of scientific knowledge in Africa,” which appeared in Koers ‐ Bulletin for Christian Scholarship, Volume 83 (1): 1–13. I argue that Sebola's piece provides a partial guide to understanding the state of the knowledge industry in Africa, particularly in South Africa. Safe to say that Sebola's work deepens scholarly and public discourse on the politics of scholarship in Africa and the world at large. However, I do not intend to blatantly praise Sebola's contribution to this academic area, which remains under researched due to the reasons that are beyond the scope of this article. In particular, the current article aspires to identify scholarly weaknesses in Sebola's work with a view to correcting them by offering an alternative view. This correction deserves the attention of all scholars and practitioners especially because it is interdisciplinary in nature, and it is poised to undo the misinformation disseminated in Sebola's piece. Such misinformation has a potential to overshadow the few truths advanced in his article. Methodologically, this article is based on document review, conversations, and interdisciplinary discourse analysis in its broadest form. 相似文献