Pub Date : 2024-03-01Epub Date: 2023-11-29DOI: 10.1177/00380261231213233
Daniel Edmiston
Mainstream poverty analysis currently renders certain people and degrees of privation more socially legible than others across high-income countries. This article examines how these hierarchies carry through to and corrupt wider social scientific analysis, inscribing differential value to actors and phenomena in ways that undermine social understanding and explanation. First, conventional approaches to poverty analysis and measurement obscure the de facto prevalence of deep poverty, as well as those most subject to its violence. Second, a growing number of hyper-marginalised groups are missing from population income surveys, undermining the accuracy of (deep) poverty estimates and public understanding of both its determinants and dynamics. Third, the inferential and external validity of income surveys is significantly diminished by problems surrounding data quality and coverage. Attempts to address this have principally focused on improving data quality, but as demonstrated in this article, these strategies exacerbate poor representation of the lowest-income groups in distributional analysis. Much more than merely technical or pragmatic, these are theoretical and normative judgements about who counts in welfare policy and politics. Overall, I demonstrate how current data practices occlude some the most violent forms of denigration and exploitation that structure advanced marginality, particularly the gendered, racialised, bordering and ableist practices underpinning state-citizen dynamics. Focusing principally on the UK context, I argue that the epistemic erasure committed features in and systematises a policy blindness to deep poverty for some of the most marginalised social groups making it harder to evidence its effects and address its causes across high-income countries.
{"title":"Who counts in poverty research?","authors":"Daniel Edmiston","doi":"10.1177/00380261231213233","DOIUrl":"10.1177/00380261231213233","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mainstream poverty analysis currently renders certain people and degrees of privation more socially legible than others across high-income countries. This article examines how these hierarchies carry through to and corrupt wider social scientific analysis, inscribing differential value to actors and phenomena in ways that undermine social understanding and explanation. First, conventional approaches to poverty analysis and measurement obscure the <i>de facto</i> prevalence of deep poverty, as well as those most subject to its violence. Second, a growing number of hyper-marginalised groups are missing from population income surveys, undermining the accuracy of (deep) poverty estimates and public understanding of both its determinants and dynamics. Third, the inferential and external validity of income surveys is significantly diminished by problems surrounding data quality and coverage. Attempts to address this have principally focused on improving data quality, but as demonstrated in this article, these strategies exacerbate poor representation of the lowest-income groups in distributional analysis. Much more than merely technical or pragmatic, these are theoretical and normative judgements about who counts in welfare policy and politics. Overall, I demonstrate how current data practices occlude some the most violent forms of denigration and exploitation that structure advanced marginality, particularly the gendered, racialised, bordering and ableist practices underpinning state-citizen dynamics. Focusing principally on the UK context, I argue that the epistemic erasure committed features in and systematises a policy blindness to deep poverty for some of the most marginalised social groups making it harder to evidence its effects and address its causes across high-income countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":48250,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7616683/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142401627","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-29DOI: 10.1177/00380261231212764
Amy Chandler, Sarah Wright
Sociological research on suicide has tended to favour functionalist approaches, and quantitative methods. This paper argues for an alternative engagement - drawing on interpretive paradigms, and inspired by 'live' methodologies, we make an argument for a haunted sociology of suicide. This approach, informed by Avery Gordon's haunted sociological imagination and Lauren Berlant's concept of slow death, works between the structural realities of inequalities in suicide rates and the more (in)tangible affects of suicide as they are lived. These theoretical engagements are illustrated through an empirical study which used collaborative, arts-based discussion groups about suicide. The groups were held with 14 people, all affected in different ways by suicide, and attending a community-based mental health centre in a semi-rural location in Scotland, UK. A narrative-informed analysis of data generated through these groups shows the creative potential of both arts-based methodologies, and interpretive sociologies, in deepening understanding of how inequalities in rates of suicide may be experienced and made sense of. We illustrate this via two related metaphors ('the point' and 'the edge') which recurred in the data. Our analysis underlines the vital relevance of sociology to suicide studies - and the urgent need for diverse sociological engagement and action on this topic.
{"title":"Suicide as slow death: towards a haunted sociology of suicide.","authors":"Amy Chandler, Sarah Wright","doi":"10.1177/00380261231212764","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261231212764","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sociological research on suicide has tended to favour functionalist approaches, and quantitative methods. This paper argues for an alternative engagement - drawing on interpretive paradigms, and inspired by 'live' methodologies, we make an argument for a haunted sociology of suicide. This approach, informed by Avery Gordon's haunted sociological imagination and Lauren Berlant's concept of slow death, works between the structural realities of inequalities in suicide rates and the more (in)tangible <i>affects</i> of suicide as they are lived. These theoretical engagements are illustrated through an empirical study which used collaborative, arts-based discussion groups about suicide. The groups were held with 14 people, all affected in different ways by suicide, and attending a community-based mental health centre in a semi-rural location in Scotland, UK. A narrative-informed analysis of data generated through these groups shows the creative potential of both arts-based methodologies, and interpretive sociologies, in deepening understanding of how inequalities in rates of suicide may be experienced and made sense of. We illustrate this via two related metaphors ('the point' and 'the edge') which recurred in the data. Our analysis underlines the vital relevance of sociology to suicide studies - and the urgent need for diverse sociological engagement and action on this topic.</p>","PeriodicalId":48250,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7616585/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142477955","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-10DOI: 10.1177/00380261231205427
Andrea Schikowitz, Nina Pohler
This article develops an empirically grounded frame for analysing varieties of alternativeness, using the case of such collaborative housing groups in Vienna (so-called Baugruppen) which aim to overcome the commodification of housing as well as the standardisation in social housing provision. Through experimenting with alternative ways of organising and living together they strive for social and political change. Taking inspiration from literature on commoning and alternative spaces, the article draws on French pragmatist sociology as well as post-actor-network theory (ANT) and assemblage approaches to focus on relational practices and different kinds of commonality as a basis for collective action. It analyses varieties of alternativeness as relational constellations by tracing how different groups compose commonality amongst each other, and how they relate to various actors. In doing so, it contributes to a situated understanding of the relations and relational practices that sustain alternatives, as well as the possibilities of scaling and transformation that specific variations of alternative housing hold.
{"title":"Varieties of alternativeness: Relational practices in collaborative housing in Vienna","authors":"Andrea Schikowitz, Nina Pohler","doi":"10.1177/00380261231205427","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261231205427","url":null,"abstract":"This article develops an empirically grounded frame for analysing varieties of alternativeness, using the case of such collaborative housing groups in Vienna (so-called Baugruppen) which aim to overcome the commodification of housing as well as the standardisation in social housing provision. Through experimenting with alternative ways of organising and living together they strive for social and political change. Taking inspiration from literature on commoning and alternative spaces, the article draws on French pragmatist sociology as well as post-actor-network theory (ANT) and assemblage approaches to focus on relational practices and different kinds of commonality as a basis for collective action. It analyses varieties of alternativeness as relational constellations by tracing how different groups compose commonality amongst each other, and how they relate to various actors. In doing so, it contributes to a situated understanding of the relations and relational practices that sustain alternatives, as well as the possibilities of scaling and transformation that specific variations of alternative housing hold.","PeriodicalId":48250,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135186584","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-10DOI: 10.1177/00380261231207196
Erica Borgstrom, Annelieke Driessen, Marian Krawczyk, Emma Kirby, John MacArtney, Kathryn Almack
Bidding for research funding has increasingly become a main feature of academic work from the doctoral level and beyond. Individually and collectively, the process of grant writing – from idea conceptualisation to administration – involves considerable work, including emotional work in imagining possible futures in which the project is enacted. Competition and failure in grant capture are high, yet there is little discussion about how academics experience grant rejections. In this article we draw on our experiences with grant rejections, as authors with diverse social science backgrounds working with death and bereavement, to discuss how grant rejection can be conceptualised as a form of loss and lead to feelings of grief. We end by considering what forms of recognition and support this may enable.
{"title":"Grieving academic grant rejections: Examining funding failure and experiences of loss","authors":"Erica Borgstrom, Annelieke Driessen, Marian Krawczyk, Emma Kirby, John MacArtney, Kathryn Almack","doi":"10.1177/00380261231207196","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261231207196","url":null,"abstract":"Bidding for research funding has increasingly become a main feature of academic work from the doctoral level and beyond. Individually and collectively, the process of grant writing – from idea conceptualisation to administration – involves considerable work, including emotional work in imagining possible futures in which the project is enacted. Competition and failure in grant capture are high, yet there is little discussion about how academics experience grant rejections. In this article we draw on our experiences with grant rejections, as authors with diverse social science backgrounds working with death and bereavement, to discuss how grant rejection can be conceptualised as a form of loss and lead to feelings of grief. We end by considering what forms of recognition and support this may enable.","PeriodicalId":48250,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135186738","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-25DOI: 10.1177/00380261231202862
Ming-sho Ho
The resource mobilization (RM) theory has long discovered the significance of money for protests; yet can this insight be applied to nowadays’ decentralized movements, characterized by the absence of organizational leadership and more creative and spontaneous participation from below? While the RM perspective is anchored in a political economy of organizational fundraising, it is time to bring in Viviana Zelizer’s economic sociology to understand how participants utilize the role of donors, consumers, savers, and investors for the movement purpose. Focusing on Hong Kong’s prodemocracy movement, this article theorizes the full panoply of ‘monetary mobilization’ to revise RM’s narrow conception. By offering a safer and anonymous channel of expression, monetary mobilization emerges as a substitute for in-person participation for risk-averse citizens with financial means. Money is always loaded with symbolic meanings and ethical considerations so that it also functions as a vehicle of the moral outrage and utopian aspirations. Participants are keen to establish a proper relationship between sponsors and beneficiaries by exercising diligent oversight to prevent its corruption. Contrary to the instrumentalist conception, money is per se not a fully fungible and all-purpose resource.
{"title":"Movement meaning of money: Monetary mobilization in Hong Kong’s prodemocracy movement","authors":"Ming-sho Ho","doi":"10.1177/00380261231202862","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261231202862","url":null,"abstract":"The resource mobilization (RM) theory has long discovered the significance of money for protests; yet can this insight be applied to nowadays’ decentralized movements, characterized by the absence of organizational leadership and more creative and spontaneous participation from below? While the RM perspective is anchored in a political economy of organizational fundraising, it is time to bring in Viviana Zelizer’s economic sociology to understand how participants utilize the role of donors, consumers, savers, and investors for the movement purpose. Focusing on Hong Kong’s prodemocracy movement, this article theorizes the full panoply of ‘monetary mobilization’ to revise RM’s narrow conception. By offering a safer and anonymous channel of expression, monetary mobilization emerges as a substitute for in-person participation for risk-averse citizens with financial means. Money is always loaded with symbolic meanings and ethical considerations so that it also functions as a vehicle of the moral outrage and utopian aspirations. Participants are keen to establish a proper relationship between sponsors and beneficiaries by exercising diligent oversight to prevent its corruption. Contrary to the instrumentalist conception, money is per se not a fully fungible and all-purpose resource.","PeriodicalId":48250,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135113731","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-18DOI: 10.1177/00380261231202879
Ann Leahy, Delia Ferri
This article critically discusses participation by people with disabilities in the arts, drawing on Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital. It is informed by a qualitative study with representatives of organisations working on arts and disability in 22 European countries. The article highlights that experiences of inequality at various levels, including within education systems, and medicalised understandings of what disability is, continue to hamper arts participation and development of cultural capital by people with disabilities. A Bourdieusian analysis unveils how organisations working on arts and disability consciously engage in ‘high’ arts practices as an expression of distinction and in a way that is designed to reframe what is culturally valued within their fields. It also demonstrates the continued relevance of Bourdieu’s theorising of cultural capital and of arts practices as distinction for potentially marginalised groups. Furthermore, participants often linked arts participation involving high artistic standards to potential change in how societies understand and relate to disability, connecting cultural practices and political struggles.
{"title":"Cultivating cultural capital and transforming cultural fields: A study with arts and disability organisations in Europe","authors":"Ann Leahy, Delia Ferri","doi":"10.1177/00380261231202879","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261231202879","url":null,"abstract":"This article critically discusses participation by people with disabilities in the arts, drawing on Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital. It is informed by a qualitative study with representatives of organisations working on arts and disability in 22 European countries. The article highlights that experiences of inequality at various levels, including within education systems, and medicalised understandings of what disability is, continue to hamper arts participation and development of cultural capital by people with disabilities. A Bourdieusian analysis unveils how organisations working on arts and disability consciously engage in ‘high’ arts practices as an expression of distinction and in a way that is designed to reframe what is culturally valued within their fields. It also demonstrates the continued relevance of Bourdieu’s theorising of cultural capital and of arts practices as distinction for potentially marginalised groups. Furthermore, participants often linked arts participation involving high artistic standards to potential change in how societies understand and relate to disability, connecting cultural practices and political struggles.","PeriodicalId":48250,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135888158","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-11DOI: 10.1177/00380261231202648
Scarlet Harris
In recent years, questions of policing, prisons and the wider criminal justice system have increasingly taken centre stage in discussions and practices of anti-racism in Britain. More specifically, the Black Lives Matter movement, the Covid-19 pandemic and the introduction of the Conservative government’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts (PCSC) Act have all contributed to the emergence of a nascent movement for police and prison abolition. At the same time, ongoing resistance to state-sanctioned Islamophobia – the majority of which has been driven by Muslim-led organisations and communities – has focused on the securitisation of Muslims in Britain and beyond. Yet these two key strands of anti-racist work have tended to remain politically and analytically distinct. This article seeks to develop a dialogue between the theory and practice of police/prison abolition and the issue of Islamophobia in Britain, exploring the possibilities for solidarity-building in the current moment. I consider how (1) sociological theories of race, racism and racialisation, and (2) an engagement with British histories of radical anti-racism (specifically British Black Power) offer resources for revealing key connections between the policing and imprisonment of differently racialised populations and associated forms of resistance. I then explore how a more ‘joined up’ analysis might facilitate coalition-building on the ground in the current moment, before expanding the discussion beyond Britain to consider the Palestinian struggle as a model for developing international, abolitionist solidarity attuned to the relationality of race and racisms.
{"title":"(Re)connecting anti-racisms: Islamophobia and the politics of police/prison abolition in contemporary Britain","authors":"Scarlet Harris","doi":"10.1177/00380261231202648","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261231202648","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, questions of policing, prisons and the wider criminal justice system have increasingly taken centre stage in discussions and practices of anti-racism in Britain. More specifically, the Black Lives Matter movement, the Covid-19 pandemic and the introduction of the Conservative government’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts (PCSC) Act have all contributed to the emergence of a nascent movement for police and prison abolition. At the same time, ongoing resistance to state-sanctioned Islamophobia – the majority of which has been driven by Muslim-led organisations and communities – has focused on the securitisation of Muslims in Britain and beyond. Yet these two key strands of anti-racist work have tended to remain politically and analytically distinct. This article seeks to develop a dialogue between the theory and practice of police/prison abolition and the issue of Islamophobia in Britain, exploring the possibilities for solidarity-building in the current moment. I consider how (1) sociological theories of race, racism and racialisation, and (2) an engagement with British histories of radical anti-racism (specifically British Black Power) offer resources for revealing key connections between the policing and imprisonment of differently racialised populations and associated forms of resistance. I then explore how a more ‘joined up’ analysis might facilitate coalition-building on the ground in the current moment, before expanding the discussion beyond Britain to consider the Palestinian struggle as a model for developing international, abolitionist solidarity attuned to the relationality of race and racisms.","PeriodicalId":48250,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136210959","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-10DOI: 10.1177/00380261231198325
Lorenzo Velotti, Luca Michele Cigna
In the past, the working class was perceived as a cohesive social and political subject, although this was never fully the case, and it is certainly less the case today. Class, in fact, is not just defined by economic attributes, but also by social, cultural and ethical ones. Care, understood either as work or values, is fundamental for better understanding class. The implications of the relationship between care values and class are yet not fully understood. In this article, building on David Graeber’s intuition regarding the caring classes, we theorise and statistically explore the existence of a working-class care ethos by examining which socio-demographic and occupational groups share care values. Using European Social Survey (ESS) data and ordinal logistic regressions, we test to what extent self-perceptions of care for others are associated with occupational/working profiles and socio-demographic characteristics. We find that caring for others is a value shared, transversally, by an intersection of different individuals who experience a few conditions of subalternity in the context of patriarchal and racial capitalism; a left-wing political orientation and a background of political/union organising; some specific occupational profiles marked by interpersonal interaction; and, most significantly, by explicit forms of care work. We conclude by speculating that the concept of caring classes can be a useful one towards a fertile terrain of political struggle.
{"title":"The caring classes: A socio-demographic and occupational analysis of caring values","authors":"Lorenzo Velotti, Luca Michele Cigna","doi":"10.1177/00380261231198325","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261231198325","url":null,"abstract":"In the past, the working class was perceived as a cohesive social and political subject, although this was never fully the case, and it is certainly less the case today. Class, in fact, is not just defined by economic attributes, but also by social, cultural and ethical ones. Care, understood either as work or values, is fundamental for better understanding class. The implications of the relationship between care values and class are yet not fully understood. In this article, building on David Graeber’s intuition regarding the caring classes, we theorise and statistically explore the existence of a working-class care ethos by examining which socio-demographic and occupational groups share care values. Using European Social Survey (ESS) data and ordinal logistic regressions, we test to what extent self-perceptions of care for others are associated with occupational/working profiles and socio-demographic characteristics. We find that caring for others is a value shared, transversally, by an intersection of different individuals who experience a few conditions of subalternity in the context of patriarchal and racial capitalism; a left-wing political orientation and a background of political/union organising; some specific occupational profiles marked by interpersonal interaction; and, most significantly, by explicit forms of care work. We conclude by speculating that the concept of caring classes can be a useful one towards a fertile terrain of political struggle.","PeriodicalId":48250,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136358347","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-04DOI: 10.1177/00380261231201475
Jannik Schritt, Jan-Peter Voß
What happens when practices are transferred from one place to another? This question lurks in the background of competing concepts of social order, modernization and globalization: Does it expand a homogeneous space where the functionality of original practices is reproduced? Or does it mix up any settled orders and create a dynamic space of heterogeneous assemblages? We here draw on a mobile ethnography following the travel of ‘mini-publics’, a pratice of organizing public participation, across different situations. We find three different modes by which mobilized elements of this practice (people, texts and artefacts) link up with local configurations: Firstly, colonization is when the original practice is sought to be replicated at the site of destination, reflecting a modern ambition to territorially expand the order that guarantees the original function. Secondly, appropriation is when mobilized elements of practice are left to freely change their meanings and effects as they are absorbed into various local configurations, reflecting a postmodern ambition to dissolve boundaries and hybridize settled orders. Thirdly, commensuration is when elements embedded in different sites are linked with each other through a broader abstract model within which they are positioned as functionally equivalent, reflecting a reflexive-modern ambition to build network infrastructures for integrating diversity. We find that the three modes coexist and thus propose them as components of a broader conceptual repertoire for empirically analysing how transfer happens, how translocal spaces are constituted, and how globalization takes shape, rather than a priori assuming either one, or the other mode as the generally dominant pattern.
{"title":"Colonization, appropriation, commensuration: Three modes of translation","authors":"Jannik Schritt, Jan-Peter Voß","doi":"10.1177/00380261231201475","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261231201475","url":null,"abstract":"What happens when practices are transferred from one place to another? This question lurks in the background of competing concepts of social order, modernization and globalization: Does it expand a homogeneous space where the functionality of original practices is reproduced? Or does it mix up any settled orders and create a dynamic space of heterogeneous assemblages? We here draw on a mobile ethnography following the travel of ‘mini-publics’, a pratice of organizing public participation, across different situations. We find three different modes by which mobilized elements of this practice (people, texts and artefacts) link up with local configurations: Firstly, colonization is when the original practice is sought to be replicated at the site of destination, reflecting a modern ambition to territorially expand the order that guarantees the original function. Secondly, appropriation is when mobilized elements of practice are left to freely change their meanings and effects as they are absorbed into various local configurations, reflecting a postmodern ambition to dissolve boundaries and hybridize settled orders. Thirdly, commensuration is when elements embedded in different sites are linked with each other through a broader abstract model within which they are positioned as functionally equivalent, reflecting a reflexive-modern ambition to build network infrastructures for integrating diversity. We find that the three modes coexist and thus propose them as components of a broader conceptual repertoire for empirically analysing how transfer happens, how translocal spaces are constituted, and how globalization takes shape, rather than a priori assuming either one, or the other mode as the generally dominant pattern.","PeriodicalId":48250,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135592740","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-04DOI: 10.1177/00380261231201473
Rachel Fishberg, Anton Grau Larsen, Kristoffer Kropp
A growing body of work has problematised how global epistemic inequality is reproduced in contemporary university settings and epistemic cultures – thinking through the lens of Eurocentrism and utilising the language of a Global North and South. However, the extent to which a relationship between geopolitical and epistemic inequality is woven into knowledge production within Europe has received less attention. Rising EU funding opportunities have facilitated a corresponding climb in transnational European social science collaborations, in concert with an expansion of empirical locations with which these projects engage. Still, increases in member state participation do not necessarily contribute to a more balanced epistemic landscape for knowledge production. Not all countries are treated equally as cases and often, these patterns of inequality reflect what Maria do Mar Pereira calls the epistemic status of nations: the idea that certain countries and continents are considered more or less likely to produce valuable or exportable scholarly knowledge. In this article, Pereira’s theory of epistemic status is extended in its implications to study choices for the selection of countries as cases. We use both quantitative data from the EU CORDIS register and ethnographic data exploring academic and collaborative practices in transnational EU-funded projects. The article addresses the ‘where’ of collaborative research by focusing on epistemic attributes rather than participatory optics. In doing so, we reflect not only on the structures and strategies of science funding in Europe but also further unsettle discussions around global epistemic inequality within academic theory and practices.
越来越多的工作提出了全球认知不平等是如何在当代大学环境和认知文化中再现的问题——通过欧洲中心主义的视角思考，并利用全球北方和南方的语言。然而，地缘政治和认知不平等之间的关系在多大程度上融入了欧洲内部的知识生产，这一点受到的关注较少。不断增加的欧盟资助机会促进了欧洲跨国社会科学合作的相应攀升，与此同时，这些项目所涉及的经验地点也在扩大。尽管如此，成员国参与的增加并不一定有助于知识生产的更平衡的认识格局。并不是所有的国家都被平等对待，通常，这些不平等的模式反映了Maria do Mar Pereira所说的国家的认知地位:某些国家和大陆被认为或多或少有可能产生有价值的或可出口的学术知识。在本文中，佩雷拉的认识论地位理论在其含义扩展到研究选择国家作为案例的选择。我们使用欧盟CORDIS登记的定量数据和民族志数据，探索欧盟资助的跨国项目的学术和合作实践。本文通过关注认知属性而不是参与性光学来解决合作研究的“位置”问题。在这样做的过程中，我们不仅反思了欧洲科学资助的结构和策略，而且还进一步扰乱了学术理论和实践中围绕全球认知不平等的讨论。
{"title":"The ‘where’ of EU social science collaborations: How epistemic inequalities and geopolitical power asymmetries persist in research about Europe","authors":"Rachel Fishberg, Anton Grau Larsen, Kristoffer Kropp","doi":"10.1177/00380261231201473","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261231201473","url":null,"abstract":"A growing body of work has problematised how global epistemic inequality is reproduced in contemporary university settings and epistemic cultures – thinking through the lens of Eurocentrism and utilising the language of a Global North and South. However, the extent to which a relationship between geopolitical and epistemic inequality is woven into knowledge production within Europe has received less attention. Rising EU funding opportunities have facilitated a corresponding climb in transnational European social science collaborations, in concert with an expansion of empirical locations with which these projects engage. Still, increases in member state participation do not necessarily contribute to a more balanced epistemic landscape for knowledge production. Not all countries are treated equally as cases and often, these patterns of inequality reflect what Maria do Mar Pereira calls the epistemic status of nations: the idea that certain countries and continents are considered more or less likely to produce valuable or exportable scholarly knowledge. In this article, Pereira’s theory of epistemic status is extended in its implications to study choices for the selection of countries as cases. We use both quantitative data from the EU CORDIS register and ethnographic data exploring academic and collaborative practices in transnational EU-funded projects. The article addresses the ‘where’ of collaborative research by focusing on epistemic attributes rather than participatory optics. In doing so, we reflect not only on the structures and strategies of science funding in Europe but also further unsettle discussions around global epistemic inequality within academic theory and practices.","PeriodicalId":48250,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135591614","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号