Suchergebnisse

Offered are perspectives on management science, social science, & policy making that may contribute to a clearer understanding of the role of rational methodologies. Criticisms that the social sciences are ineffective as aids to government decision making are seen to come from misconceptions about the ways of politicians & the social sciences' mission. The mission of management science is to make organizational problems rational by increasing order & control, & by giving form to the specific issues & contingencies that occur; further, rationalization communicates the intentions of policies & makes speculations useful in defining political issues. Paradigms are viewed as inadequate for the conceptualization of specific policy problems; in many areas paradigms are difficult to establish. D. Dunseath.

This paper asks how the social sciences can engage with the idea of the Anthropocene in productive ways. In response to this question we outline an interpretative research agenda that allows critical engagement with the Anthropocene as a socially and culturally bounded object with many possible meanings and political trajectories. In order to facilitate the kind of political mobilization required to meet the complex environmental challenges of our times, we argue that the social sciences should refrain from adjusting to standardized research agendas and templates. A more urgent analytical challenge lies in exposing, challenging and extending the ontological assumptions that inform how we make sense of and respond to a rapidly changing environment. By cultivating environmental research that opens up multiple interpretations of the Anthropocene, the social sciences can help to extend the realm of the possible for environmental politics. ; Funding Agencies: research project 'Novel Forms of Governance by Nested Networks (NESNET)' by the German Ministry for Education and Research, Funding Initiative "Research on the Relationship between Science, Politics and Society" KZ 01UZ1003 Linköping University

It has now been four years of contested elections for the Council of
the Association. In this note we ask: What can we learn about these
elections from a political science perspective?

International audience ; This paper studies the economic and social thought of Friedrich Hayek, a leading figure of contemporary liberalism. Our goal is to present the broad lines of hayekian liberalism to describe its position on a specific question: that of the role of democracy in the determination of what constitutes a good society. By society, we mean, according to Hayek, the institutions - rules of conduct/constitution - which men, as social beings, can consider in their reciprocal relationships. The goal is thus one of knowing the place Hayek grants to democracy in the definition of good social rules i.e.: Is Hayek in favor of constitutional democracy? Our answer is no. In contrast to James Buchanan and Viktor Vanberg, Hayek challenges citizen sovereignty on constitutional matters. And this, because he considers that this field concerns scientific analysis rather than democratic choice. ; Cet article étudie la pensée économique et sociale de Friedrich Hayek, figure majeure du libéralisme contemporain. Notre but est de présenter les grandes lignes du libéralisme hayékien pour en éclairer la position sur : le rôle de la démocratie dans la détermination d'une bonne société. Par société, comme Hayek, nous entendons les institutions - règles de conduite/constitution - que les hommes, en tant qu'êtres sociaux, peuvent envisager dans leurs rapports réciproques. L'enjeu est de savoir quelle place Hayek accorde à la démocratie dans la définition de bonnes règles sociales ou encore : Hayek est-il favorable à la démocratie constitutionnelle ? Notre réponse est négative. Contrairement à James Buchanan et Viktor Vanberg, Hayek récuse la souveraineté des citoyens en matière constitutionnelle. Et ce, parce qu'il estime que ce domaine relève de l'expertise scientifique plutôt que du choix démocratique.

International audience ; This paper studies the economic and social thought of Friedrich Hayek, a leading figure of contemporary liberalism. Our goal is to present the broad lines of hayekian liberalism to describe its position on a specific question: that of the role of democracy in the determination of what constitutes a good society. By society, we mean, according to Hayek, the institutions - rules of conduct/constitution - which men, as social beings, can consider in their reciprocal relationships. The goal is thus one of knowing the place Hayek grants to democracy in the definition of good social rules i.e.: Is Hayek in favor of constitutional democracy? Our answer is no. In contrast to James Buchanan and Viktor Vanberg, Hayek challenges citizen sovereignty on constitutional matters. And this, because he considers that this field concerns scientific analysis rather than democratic choice. ; Cet article étudie la pensée économique et sociale de Friedrich Hayek, figure majeure du libéralisme contemporain. Notre but est de présenter les grandes lignes du libéralisme hayékien pour en éclairer la position sur : le rôle de la démocratie dans la détermination d'une bonne société. Par société, comme Hayek, nous entendons les institutions - règles de conduite/constitution - que les hommes, en tant qu'êtres sociaux, peuvent envisager dans leurs rapports réciproques. L'enjeu est de savoir quelle place Hayek accorde à la démocratie dans la définition de bonnes règles sociales ou encore : Hayek est-il favorable à la démocratie constitutionnelle ? Notre réponse est négative. Contrairement à James Buchanan et Viktor Vanberg, Hayek récuse la souveraineté des citoyens en matière constitutionnelle. Et ce, parce qu'il estime que ce domaine relève de l'expertise scientifique plutôt que du choix démocratique.

This report centres on two case studies concerning contract farming arrangements between growers and buyers in Swaziland. It also mentions the most important aspects of the economy and land tenure system briefly. The performance of the two schemes is evaluated and problems with replicating these contract farming schemes elsewhere are pointed out. (DÜI-Kst)

AbstractThis essay explores how to broaden the scope of what constitutes anthropological and ethnographic research by cross‐fertilizing with data science. I discuss four types of relationships anthropologists have sought to foster with data science: anthropology of data science, anthropology over data science, anthropology with data science, and, the least developed of the four, anthropology by data science. Data science as a field has cultivated abductive, bottom‐up forms of quantitative research, which provide useful quantitative parallels to similarly abductive, bottom‐up qualitative techniques in ethnographic research. Anthropologists should adopt an anthropology by data science perspective through incorporating machine‐learning and other data science techniques into anthropological research. Nick Seaver's concept of bastard disciplines and methodologies provides a helpful framework for such work. [data science, machine learning, ethnography, anthropology]

Environmental science and sustainability : what's the big idea? -- Ethics, economics, and policy : who or what do we value? -- Matter and energy : what are the building blocks of sustainability? -- Life : what shapes biodiversity? -- Conservation : why is it important to protect biodiversity? -- Human population : can we have too many people? -- Water : how do we use it and affect its quality? -- Air : what are we breathing? -- Land : how does it shape us? -- Systems and cycles : are we changing Earth's life support system? -- Climate : how does global climate change? -- Food : how do we feed ourselves? -- Fossil fuels : energy of the industrial age? -- Energy alternatives : how are our energy decisions changing? -- Waste : what happens to all the stuff we use? -- Urbanization : why are cities growing? -- Environmental health and justice : how does our environment affect our health? -- Decision making : why do our choices matter? -- Groups and organizations : how do we work together for sustainability? -- Government : how can policy influence sustainability?

"Reprinted from THE ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science for July, 1902." ; Cover title. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Science and technology are changing. We have seen the emergence of open and citizen-based science practices in the context of facing pandemics, such as COVID-19, xenophobia, or inequality, among others. Open science is a movement that advocates the collective construction of knowledge. This perspective has shown its importance with the emergence of rapid response initiatives to the current situation at national and international levels. This article discusses the relevance of knowledge commons and transparent objects in the era of intellectual property. Solidarity technoscientific initiatives become a vehicle to pose free culture as a pillar of a human future based on mutual support. In that sense, universities, publishers, students, the scientific and engineering community, and even citizens are creating efforts around open science intending to share results, data, designs, specifications, and even resources despite new socio-political limits and precautions. We argue that a technoscientific movement based on solidarity, free and open culture, is key to permeate and transform the various layers of governments, research institutions, and citizens-led initiatives. To address this, several examples are exposed offering a brief critical appraisal in the context of open science, a concept still in the making.