Transcript Legitimate assemblies and assembling legitimacy

Legitimate assemblies:
is collaborative research the
‘pathway to impact’?
Susan Molyneux-Hodgson
Sociological Studies
University of Sheffield
Speaking knowledge to power
• Does anyone think they are listened to?
• Many ‘policy makers’ are social scientists; with
little understanding of science, but even less
of its critique
• Is collaborative /research work a way forward
to address the issues different constituencies
see?
• Two funded projects with team members
drawn from diverse epistemic communities
Theorising epistemic communities
• In sociology of science, scientific communities have
been understood as:
– a normative unit (Merton)
– thought collectives / thought styles (Fleck)
– a paradigmatic (consensual) unit (Kuhn)
– a transactional unit (Hagstrom, Bourdieu, Latour and
Woolgar)
– communities of promise/hope (Brown, Martin)
• Scientists work together, they are part of a collective
• They work within communities that share (to some
degree) a language, theories, technologies, methods, ...
Theorising epistemic communities
• epistemic cultures are ‘those amalgams of
arrangements and mechanisms- bonded
through affinity, necessity, and historical
coincidence - which, in a given field, make up
how we know what we know. Epistemic cultures
are cultures that create and warrant knowledge,
and the premier knowledge institution
throughout the world is, still, science (KnorrCetina 1999:1)
Working together: Rationales
• Policy imperative, ‘real-world’ problems (both projects)
• Issues of relevance to the 'environment and society'
moniker cannot be addressed fully by a reliance on
either environmental science or social science. (WES)
• The goal of the sustainable communities’ agenda is to
maximise the social, economic and environmental
benefits of urban development … We need innovation
to create multifunctional solutions, and the evidence
through which stakeholders can judge and differentiate
these solutions. (URSULA)
Working together: Membership
• .. established researchers in the fields of
environmental science (including ecologists,
hydrologists and statisticians) and social science
(including sociologists and planners) alongside
younger researchers and PhD students from the
contributing groups. (WES)
• The University of Sheffield is one of the strongest
research universities in the UK …Two outside
academics will fill gaps in the Sheffield portfolio.
(URSULA)
Working together: Meeting points
• The 'change of scale' embedded in the (WFD) initiative yields
a set of themes around which both social and environmental
scientists can establish a dialogue.
• .. enable established researchers to disseminate existing
research to new audiences and to facilitate the development
of a new research agenda
• .. a means to explore ways to do inter-disciplinary research,
engaging with theoretical, conceptual and methodological
concerns (WES)
• The entire research team will be co-located to maximise
efficiency and interdisciplinarity.
• The initial and final phases involve the whole team in
developing common language and goals and delivering
results.
• All the activities will be integrated through a common systems
modelling framework, 3D-visualisation and a GIS based data
handling facility. (URSULA)
Working together: Approaches
• What and where do we need to study in order to
investigate environment-society relations?
• Which fields of practice require further theoretical and
conceptual development to advance research in the
area?
• How can the methodological implications raised by the
above, be addressed? (WES)
• URSULA will develop and test evidence-based and
integrated innovations to satisfy the sustainable living
agenda of urban river corridors.
• … integrate soft and hard engineering … achieve
optimal performance .. evaluate benefits of interventions
Metaphors of ‘mixing’
Key messages
• A single rationale (need for evidence-based policy;
need for multi/inter-disciplinary work to solve a
‘problem’) does not imply a singular way forward
• The bringing together of existing
communities is not the same everywhere
epistemic
• The intents of meeting are multiple
• There is a need for explicit epistemic pluralism
• To get ‘ipa’ into policy is not (merely) a technical
problem (how to do it) but is a political one (reframing
the terms of the debate; a culture change)
• So, what politics?