Continuity or Discontinuity? Scientific Governance in the Pre-History of the 1977 Law of Higher Education and Research in Sweden
Minerva 50 (1):65-96 (2012)
|Abstract||The objective of this paper is to balance two major conceptual tendencies in science policy studies, continuity and discontinuity theory. While the latter argue for fundamental and distinct changes in science policy in the late 20th century, continuity theorists show how changes do occur but not as abrupt and fundamental as discontinuity theorists suggests. As a point of departure, we will elaborate a typology of scientific governance developed by Hagendijk and Irwin ( 2006 ) and apply it to new empirical material. This makes possible a contextualization of the governance of science related to the codification of the “third assignment” of the Swedish higher education law of 1977. The law defined the relation between university science and Swedish citizens as a dissemination project, and did so despite that several earlier initiatives actually went well beyond such a narrow conceptualisation. Our material reveals continuous interactive and rival arrangements linking the state, public authorities, the universities and private industrial enterprises. We show how different but coexisting modes of governance of science existed in Sweden during the 20th century, in clear contrast with the picture promoted by discontinuity theorists. A close study of the historical development suggests that there were several periods of layered governance when interactions and dynamics associated with continuity as well as discontinuity theories were prevalent. In addition, we conclude that the typology of governance applied in the present paper is fruitful for carrying out historical analyses of the kind embarked upon in spite of certain methodological shortcomings|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Massimo Pigliucci (2003). On the Relationship Between Science and Ethics. Zygon 38 (4):871-894.
Niles Eldredge (1992). Marjorie Grene, 'Ttwo Evolutionary Theories' and Modern Evolutionary Theory. Synthese 92 (1):135 - 149.
Max Velmans (2007). The Co-Evolution of Matter and Consciousness. Velmans, Prof Max (2007) the Co-Evolution of Matter and Consciousness. [Journal (Paginated)] 44 (2):273-282.
Irwin Feller (2009). Performance Measurement and the Governance of American Academic Science. Minerva 47 (3):323-344.
Charles D. Raab (1994). Theorising the Governance of Education. British Journal of Educational Studies 42 (1):6 - 22.
Alan Irwin (2003). Science, Social Theory and Public Knowledge. Open University Press.
T. H. Irwin (2011). Continuity in the History of Autonomy. Inquiry 54 (5):442 - 459.
Francis Oakley (2005). Natural Law, Laws of Nature, Natural Rights: Continuity and Discontinuity in the History of Ideas. Continuum.
Richard Whitley (2011). Changing Governance and Authority Relations in the Public Sciences. Minerva 49 (4):359-385.
Michael Devitt (2011). Are Unconceived Alternatives a Problem for Scientific Realism? Journal for General Philosophy of Science 42 (2):285-293.
Bryan W. Husted & Carlos Serrano (2002). Corporate Governance in Mexico. Journal of Business Ethics 37 (3):337 - 348.
Evisa Kica & Diana M. Bowman (2013). Transnational Governance Arrangements: Legitimate Alternatives to Regulating Nanotechnologies? Nanoethics 7 (1):69-82.
Larry M. Jorgensen (2009). The Principle of Continuity and Leibniz's Theory of Consciousness. Journal of the History of Philosophy 47 (2):pp. 223-248.
Added to index2012-01-28
Total downloads6 ( #145,546 of 549,070 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,185 of 549,070 )
How can I increase my downloads?