Global Knowledge Production in the Social Sciences

Keim, Wiebke; Çelik, Ercüment; Wöhrer, Veronika

doi:10.4324/9781315584881

Cited by 41 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They took rigorous criticism of modern state of social sciences, naming series of limitations in Eurocentric epistemological approaches. They have included India, America, South Africa, Australia, and Europe [8].…”

Section: Sociology Of Knowledge and Vocabulary For The New Eramentioning

confidence: 99%

Introductory Chapter: Sociology of Knowledge and Epistemological Paradox of Globalization

Delić¹

2017

Epistemology and Transformation of Knowledge in Global Age

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Sociology Of Knowledge and Vocabulary For The New Eramentioning

confidence: 99%

Introductory Chapter: Sociology of Knowledge and Epistemological Paradox of Globalization

Delić¹

2017

Epistemology and Transformation of Knowledge in Global Age

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Plus généralement, le fait que le cosmopolitisme et la coopération nécessaire face aux risques globaux demeurent aveugles aux inégalités postcoloniales pose la question de savoir si la portée du global se trouve infléchie par la limitation géographique et les inégalités entre centres et périphéries dans lesquelles sont prises ces conceptualisations (Keim et al, 2014). Une première réponse a suggéré que la notion même de risque implique un discours hégémonique permettant de reproduire les structures du pouvoir (Lupton, 1999), et véhicule une vision hétéro-nome imposée aux pays en développement par les organisations internationales et les bailleurs de fonds (Wynne, 2007).…”

Section: Dossierunclassified

Dossier « Politiques du changement global. Expertises, enjeux d’échelles et frontières de l’action publique environnementale » - Les catastrophes : un horizon commun de la globalisation environnementale ?

Cabane

2015

Nat. Sci. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Résumé -Les catastrophes font de plus en plus figure d'horizon de la globalisation environnementale. La représentation des menaces qu'elles font peser à l'échelle planétaire et leur irruption sur la scène politique sont souvent vues comme le résultat d'alertes scientifiques transnationales. Pourtant, lorsque l'on considère les désastres dans différents contextes, force est de constater la pluralité de communautés scientifiques théorisant de diverses façons le lien entre changement environnemental et catastrophes. En rendant compte de la variété de ces régimes épistémiques développés en Europe, en Amérique du Nord et dans les pays dits du Sud et de leur focalisation respective sur la crise environnementale, la préparation aux catastrophes ou la vulnérabilité due au développement, l'article met à jour la coexistence de différentes ontologies du global et leur hiérarchisation dans un espace politique transnational.Abstract -Disasters: a common horizon of environmental globalization? Disasters are often portrayed as an inevitable horizon of environmental globalization. The representation of these threats on the global political stage is regularly interpreted as resulting from the work of transnational expert communities. Contrary to these homogenizing visions, the article shows how various social sciences studies on risks and disasters developed from different objects in Europe, North America, and the global South. They theorized in different ways the relation between disasters and globalization, focusing respectively on global environmental crises, disaster preparedness and vulnerabilities due to unequal development. Insisting on the multiplicity of epistemic regimes allows pinpointing the limits of risk cosmopolitism that takes for granted disasters as global phenomena as well as their common imagination. It shows the necessity to pay better attention to varying and conflicting ways of scientifically thinking about disasters, embedded in political contexts and post-colonial relations.« What work will it take to forge a common vision of problems in the global environment? » (Jasanoff, 1999, p. 149)

show abstract

“…In other words, languages are integral to theory and theorizing. Multilingual HDRs are using theoretical tools from their languages for analytical purposes to declassify the division of intellectual labor which assigns theory to English, and data to other languages [3]. Here the concept of "Tiếng Việt theoretic-linguistic tools" refers to concepts and images in Tiếng Việt which can be used as analytical tools in research into ISL which is largely written in English.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Divergence of Languages as Resources for Theorizing

Nguyễn

2017

Education Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the potential of conceptual divergences within and between languages for providing intellectual resources for theorizing. Specifically, it explores the role of multilingual researchers in using the possibilities of the plurality of intellectual cultures and languages they have access to for theorizing International Service Learning (ISL). In doing so, this investigation of conceptual divergence within/between languages shows how it is possible for multilingual researchers to extend their capabilities for theorizing; to bring forward possibilities for theorizing ISL in languages other than English; and to potentially bring new perspectives to a field of enquiry which lays claim to being "international". The process of developing the capability for theorizing begins by exploring the divergence in languages of key concepts. In this instance, the analysis focuses on the English concept of "service learning" which is rendered in Tiếng Việt (i.e., Vietnamese language) as ho . c tập phu . c vu . cộng đồng. The analysis of the conceptual divergence represented by these Tiếng Việt concepts opens up insights into ways of developing the capabilities that multilingual researchers have for theorizing. In effect, this paper contributes to the knowledge about the options multilingual researchers have for using their full linguistic repertoire for the purpose of theorizing. The study has significant implications for multilingual education, multilingual research and theorizing ISL in universities which privilege English-only monolingualism.

show abstract

Global Knowledge Production in the Social Sciences

Cited by 41 publications

References 0 publications

Introductory Chapter: Sociology of Knowledge and Epistemological Paradox of Globalization

Introductory Chapter: Sociology of Knowledge and Epistemological Paradox of Globalization

Dossier « Politiques du changement global. Expertises, enjeux d’échelles et frontières de l’action publique environnementale » - Les catastrophes : un horizon commun de la globalisation environnementale ?

Divergence of Languages as Resources for Theorizing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About