Winner of the Harald Kaufmann Prize for Senior Researchers, 2018 This book examines the question of whether the process of European integration in research funding has led to new forms of oligarchization and elite formation in the European Research Area. Based on a study of the European Research Council (ERC), the author investigates profound structural change in the social organization of science, as the ERC intervenes in public science systems that, until now, have largely been organized at the national level. Against the background of an emerging new science policy, Europe’s New Scientific Elite explores the social mechanisms that generate, reproduce and modify existing dynamics of stratification and oligarchization in science, shedding light on the strong normative impact of the ERC’s funding on problem-choice in science, the cultural legitimacy and future vision of science, and the building of new research councils of national, European and global scope. A comparative, theory-driven investigation of European research funding, this book will appeal to social scientists with interests in the sociology of knowledge.
The first detailed study of this most important class of systems which contain internal predictive models of themselves and/or of their environments and whose predictions are utilized for purposes of present control. This book develops the basic concept of a predictive model, and shows how it can be embedded into a system of feedforward control. Includes many examples and stresses analogies between wired-in anticipatory control and processes of learning and adaption, at both individual and social levels. Shows how the basic theory of such systems throws a new light both on analytic problems (understanding what is going on in an organism or a social system) and synthetic ones (developing forecasting methods for making individual or collective decisions).
Higher education reforms have been on the agenda of Western European countries for 25 years, trying to deal with self governed professional bureaucracies politically weakened by massification when an emerging common understanding enhanced their role as major actors in knowledge based economies. While university systems are deeply embedded in national settings, the ex post rationale of still on-going reforms is surprisingly uniform and “de-nationalized”. They promote (1) the “organizational turn” of universities, to varying extent substituting collegial loosely coupled entities by “integrated, goal-oriented entities deliberately choosing their own actions (and therefore open to differentiation), that can thus be held responsible for what they do” (2) the diversification of stakeholders, supposedly offering solutions to problems as various as the democratisation of universities, the shrinking of State budget resources and the diversification of university missions offering answers to changes in the making and in the use of science. When it comes to accounting for these reforms, two grand narratives of public management share the floor. NPM implies a strengthening of the capacity of the core State to direct public services organizations through management by objectives and results or contractualization, assessment, evaluation and. “Governance” focuses on “network-based” governance systems, where coordinating power and control are collectively shared between the major ‘social actors or partners’ at all levels of the decision-making system. Our results suggest that all higher education systems under study were more or less transformed according to both these narratives. It is therefore needed to understand how they combine or create contradictions. This leads us to test a third neo-weberian model. This model reaffirms the role of the State, of representative democracy, (central, regional and local), of public law (suitably modernized), preserves the idea of a public service with a distinctive status, culture and terms and conditions. It shifts from an internal orientation to bureaucratic rules towards an external orientation in meeting citizens’ needs and wishes by means of standardization of work processes and their products, based on a distinctive public service and a particular legal order survived as the foundations beneath the various packages of modernizing reforms. This book traces the national dynamics of public policies, organizational design and steering tools in seven European higher education and research systems, using these narratives to interpret and test the actual changes and the degree of national specificities and European convergence. This book is not a sum of national chapters like other presumably comparative. It does not intend to tell once again the story of the transformation of the relationships between the state and universities. It tries to use Higher education system to discuss issues on state intervention and steering and more generally the NPM, governance and neo-weberian models in a specific field. Furthermore, this book intends breaking the walls between specialists in higher education and specialist in public management and research policy. This well rooted division of labour is less that ever justified as the university mission in research (fundamental, applied, strategic) is underscored by commentors and reformers themselves. For that reason, we have chosen to observe the consequences of the dynamics of public policies, organizational design and steering tools on two specific issues related to the development of research training and organizing within universities: the transformation of research funding on the one hand and the expansion of graduate studies and doctoral schools on the other.
Since the European Research Area was launched at the beginning of the century, significant efforts have been made to realise the vision of a coherent space for science and research in Europe. But how does one define such a space and measure its development? This timely book analyses the dynamics of change in the policy and governance of science and research within Europe over the past decade. It widens the scope of traditional policy analysis by focusing attention on the interaction between policy rationales, new governance mechanisms, and the organisational dynamics of the scientific field. The contributors build a novel analytical framework to understand the European research space as one shifting from a fragmented space of “Science in Europe” to one that is labeled “European Science”. The chapters explore the dynamics of this shift through the lenses of political science, organisation theory, science policy and related analytical traditions. Towards European Science is an interdisciplinary book which will attract a wide set of scholars and professionals interested in science policy, governance and scientific practice. It will also be of use to university leaders and managers, as well as policy-makers and practitioners working on issues of internationalisation and the Europeanisation of science.
The EUROHIS project has focused on the comparability of health surveys and has uncovered some problems that arise when aiming to compare data from different countries. Similar problems of cross-cultural comparability also arise when comparing data from other sources, such as health registers, and are just as complex and difficult to tackle. One of the main advantages of health surveys, however, is the relatively low cost and time involved in adapting them according to the needs of health policy-makers. This work shows that the output from the EUROHIS project provides common instruments for the measurement of eight health indicators. The development of these instruments has required careful consideration of relevant common concepts and how these should be defined and operationalized. The instruments are freely available for use by all countries, with the aim of enhancing national health information systems and facilitating cross-national comparisons of health data.
Science for Policy Handbook provides advice on how to bring science to the attention of policymakers. This resource is dedicated to researchers and research organizations aiming to achieve policy impacts. The book includes lessons learned along the way, advice on new skills, practices for individual researchers, elements necessary for institutional change, and knowledge areas and processes in which to invest. It puts co-creation at the centre of Science for Policy 2.0, a more integrated model of knowledge-policy relationship. Covers the vital area of science for policymaking Includes contributions from leading practitioners from the Joint Research Centre/European Commission Provides key skills based on the science-policy interface needed for effective evidence-informed policymaking Presents processes of knowledge production relevant for a more holistic science-policy relationship, along with the types of knowledge that are useful in policymaking
It's a commonplace that citizens in Western democracies are disaffected with their political leaders and traditional democratic institutions. But in Democratic Legitimacy, Pierre Rosanvallon, one of today's leading political thinkers, argues that this crisis of confidence is partly a crisis of understanding. He makes the case that the sources of democratic legitimacy have shifted and multiplied over the past thirty years and that we need to comprehend and make better use of these new sources of legitimacy in order to strengthen our political self-belief and commitment to democracy. Drawing on examples from France and the United States, Rosanvallon notes that there has been a major expansion of independent commissions, NGOs, regulatory authorities, and watchdogs in recent decades. At the same time, constitutional courts have become more willing and able to challenge legislatures. These institutional developments, which serve the democratic values of impartiality and reflexivity, have been accompanied by a new attentiveness to what Rosanvallon calls the value of proximity, as governing structures have sought to find new spaces for minorities, the particular, and the local. To improve our democracies, we need to use these new sources of legitimacy more effectively and we need to incorporate them into our accounts of democratic government. An original contribution to the vigorous international debate about democratic authority and legitimacy, this promises to be one of Rosanvallon's most important books.
A guide for constructing and using composite indicators for policy makers, academics, the media and other interested parties. In particular, this handbook is concerned with indicators which compare and rank country performance.
This volume presents a compilation of composite indicators created in order to measure important aspects of the quality of European societies. It examines three main questions: do Europeans live in good societies and enjoy good lives; are European societies becoming better as time passes, or is their quality slowly deteriorating; is the quality of life of Europe’s citizens improving over time or is it gradually and irrecoverably getting worse. The volume uses a precise and rigorous system of information to answer these questions and to assess the current situation and monitor the quality of European societies. It describes and discusses fourteen key domains, and per chapter, presents five rankings of EU countries based on composite indicators, which are used as one of the best instruments social science has to synthesize a large amount of information, and they are especially well suited to measure multidimensional social phenomena. The new System of Indices on the Quality of European Societies (SIQES) presented in this volume offers a very broad and rich empirical overview of more than 70 social composite indicators and their nearly 300 dimensions. One of the key findings coming out from the SIQES is that, according to the societal quality of European countries, there exist five different “Europes” inside Europe.
