Limits of knowing or the consequences of difficult-access problems for multi-method research and public policy

How can scientists acquire an adequate level of knowledge on phenomena whose actors actively conceal their activities? Social phenomena such as terrorism, sects, corruption, Mafia organizations, drug dealers, or government intelligence agencies actively guard their secrecy, conceal their activities, decide who is allowed (not) to know, and have no interest in being observed or understood by others. The article discusses the consequences of researching difficult-access problems for doing multi-method research. In an ideal?Ctypical approach, we distinguish between social problems that can be easily accessed and those that are difficult to access or non-accessible. To distinguish the two, we define characteristics that eventually lead to the conclusion that scientific inquiry that follows the conventional paradigm of professionalism, transparency, and replicable research reaches its limits when confronted with the active resistance of phenomena that do not like to be observed, understood, or critically approached. From this flows, the necessity to think about interdisciplinary, collaborative, and investigative modes of research that come with various prices.     

The Danish Election 1998

The article analyzes the Danish national election in March 1998. Jdged from the aggregate figures, Denmark has stabilized. Net volatility was moderate, 'bloc' volatility was close to zero, and despite forecasts of a non-socialist victory, the Social Democratic-led government managed to continue. Further, in the 1990s, the periods between elections have been close to the maximum four years. Therefore, the old picture from the 1970s of Danish politics as highly unstable and as extremely volatile is now outdated. Quite the contrary at the level of individual voters. Close to a third shifted from one party to another, and even among voters who did not shift, a substantial proportion had considered voting for another party. Individual voter mobility seems to be a result of weak voter differentiation between different parties, and not a result of protest and outspoken dissatisfaction. Whatever the explanation, individual volatility is an omen of possible future instability: There is no guarantee that different voter movements will always balance out.     

Healing the Pain

The World Bank released its Global Economic Prospects 2010 in June, saying global economic recovery is advancing with developing countries leading it. But high-income countries’