Suchergebnisse

Scientiic collaboration continues to increase in frequency and importance. It has the potential to solve complex scientiic problems. The relevance of the research is caused by the role of scientiic collaboration in scientiic and technological sphere. Scientiic collaboration can be deined as a science infrastructure and as a process of intellectual cooperation. The aim of the research is to construct the model of scientiic collaboration in Russian science and technology. This has been gained by solving the following research objectives: deinition of the term «scientiic collaboration», types of collaborations consideration, analysis of intellectual and research infrastructure cooperation methods which take place in Russian scientiic organizations. The main feature of this research is the particular methodology which is based on scientometrics, comparative analysis and scientiic modeling. Scientometrics was used for deining productive scientiic collaboration in Russia. Open sources of information about international and Russian scientiic collaboration, oficial websites of Russian Ministry of Education and Science and Russian Academy of Science, such databases as Russian Statistics Committee and Web of Science can be mentioned as main information resources of the research. Main results of theoretical and practical part of the research are the original authors` vision of the base of scientiic collaborations in formation Russia which meansan effective cooperation of three components: intellectual resources (scientists and research teams), infrastructure (which can provide scientists with regular access to research equipment) and government (as a main regulator). Moreover, it should be mentioned that the main productive development option for Russian scientiic collaboration is territory integration of intellectual resources and research infrastructure.

There are measurable differences in science writing aimed at audiences of different educational levels. Differences tend to be consistent with findings on audience effects of textual variations.

This article reviews interdisciplinary toxicity literature, building from Gerald E. Markowitz and David Rosner's "deceit and denial" and Phil Brown's "contested illnesses" to argue for a third, more critical analytic that I term "empire and empirics." Deceit and denial pit corporate actors against antitoxins advocates, while contested illnesses highlight social movements. Empire and empirics center the role of imperialism in reproducing today's unevenly distributed toxic exposures. I find this third path the most generative because the products and the production of science—toxicants and toxicology—are situated in their sociohistorical, politico-economic, ecological, and affective contexts. Revealing the imperialist logics embedded into dominant ontoepistemology also illuminates alternative, liberatory pathways toward more environmentally just futures. I close with examples of "undisciplined" action research, highlighting scholar-practitioners who study toxicity with care and in nonhierarchical collaboration. While undisciplining is challenging, its potential for realizing environmental justice far outweighs the difficulties of doing science differently.

In this article, I materially situate air pollution exposure as a topic of social and political inquiry by paying attention to the increasing specificity of spaces and sites of exposure in air pollution and health research. Evidence of the unevenness of exposure and differential health effects of air pollution have led to a proliferation of studies on the risks different environments pose to bodies. There are increasingly different airs in air pollution science. In this research, bodies are often relegated to passive objects, exposed according to the environments they move between. Yet exposure implies a blurring of bodies and environments which also challenges the idea of a discrete body that is distinguishable from its material context. By studying the process of modelling indoor air pollution, I highlight how air pollution, buildings and bodies are co-implicated with one another in ways that demand new ways of materialising human exposure in science.

In recent decades, the discipline of International Relations (IR) has experienced both dramatic institutional growth and unprecedented intellectual enrichment. And yet, unlike neighbouring disciplines such as Geography, Sociology, History and Comparative Literature, it has still not generated any 'big ideas' that have impacted across the human sciences. Why is this? And what can be done about it? This article provides an answer in three steps. First, it traces the problem to IR's enduring definition as a subfield of Political Science. Second, it argues that IR should be re-grounded in its own disciplinary problematique: the consequences of (societal) multiplicity. And finally, it shows how this re-grounding unlocks the transdisciplinary potential of IR. Specifically, 'uneven and combined development' provides an example of an IR 'big idea' that could travel to other disciplines: for by operationalizing the consequences of multiplicity, it reveals the causal and constitutive significance of 'the international' for the social world as a whole.

Quantitative social science has long been dominated by self-consciously positivist approaches to the philosophy, rhetoric and methodology of research. This article outlines an alternative approach based on interpretive research methods. Interpretative approaches are usually associated with qualitative social science but are equally applicable to the analysis of quantitative data. In interpretive quantitative research, statistics are used to shed light on the unobservable data generating processes that underlie observed data. Key tenets of interpretive quantitative methodology are the triangulation of research results arrived at by analysing data from multiple perspectives, the integration of measurement and modelling into a more holistic process of discovery and the need to think reflexively about the manner in which data have come into existence. Interpretive quantitative research has the potential to yield results that are more meaningful, more understandable and more applicable (from a policy standpoint) than those achieved through conventional positivist approaches.

Numerous studies of role, employing diverse methodologies in a wide range of social contexts, have accumulated in the social sciences over many decades. The concept of role retains considerable appeal for some who still pursue the goal of a unified theory of behavior for the social sciences, and for many others who discern in the role perspective a major source of concepts and insights on which they may draw eclectically for all manner of social research. Since the 1950s, and especially during the current decade, political scientists have produced studies of role and of role conflict focusing on political and administrative actors caught up in the process of change in various independent African states. Because die number and diversity of these studies are likely to increase in the future, they merit description and evaluation as a group. Both objectives are pursued in this article, with particular reference to three works on politics and administration in Ghana, Sierra Leone, and Tanzania.