Challenging three blockages to relevance and political science: the obvious, the avoidable and the thorny

    Research output: A Conference proceeding or a Chapter in BookChapter

    2 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    This chapter explores three blockages to relevance. The first argument rests on the observation that the use of research in the world of policy is prone to the play of politics and power and that the windows of opportunity for political science to demonstrate its relevance may therefore be relatively narrow and infrequent. This first blockage will come as no surprise to anyone in political science or in politics. The play of power in decision-making is a central feature in our mutual understanding of politics. The second explanation focuses more on the lack of incentives and organizational blockages experienced by those that prioritize relevance within the profession of political science, which in turn limit the numbers of those academics that seek to make their work obviously and directly relevant. This blockage is a product of the intended and unintended consequences of institutional and individual decisions made over the last few decades and which could be addressed by a different set of choices being made. It is, therefore, an avoidable blockage. The third blockage rests on thorny issues raised by the advocacy of relevance. These include the difficult issues of untangling matters of fact and value and more generally whether political scientists can offer evidence-based solutions and advice rather than explanations of ‘what is’. The first obstacle is something that has to be worked around, the second has to be confronted and the third puzzled about and hopefully addressed by new cadres of work that build on some pioneering examples
    Original languageEnglish
    Title of host publicationThe Relevance of Political Science
    EditorsGerry Stoker, B Guy Peters, Jon Pierre
    Place of PublicationLondon
    PublisherPalgrave Macmillan
    Pages19-35
    Number of pages17
    ISBN (Print)9780230201088
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2015

    Fingerprint

    political science
    politics
    cadre
    political scientist
    profession
    incentive
    decision making
    lack
    evidence
    Values

    Cite this

    STOKER, G. (2015). Challenging three blockages to relevance and political science: the obvious, the avoidable and the thorny. In G. Stoker, B. G. Peters, & J. Pierre (Eds.), The Relevance of Political Science (pp. 19-35). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-50660-3_2
    STOKER, Gerry. / Challenging three blockages to relevance and political science: the obvious, the avoidable and the thorny. The Relevance of Political Science. editor / Gerry Stoker ; B Guy Peters ; Jon Pierre. London : Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. pp. 19-35
    @inbook{1680ac71101f46eb850c37d33e549eea,
    title = "Challenging three blockages to relevance and political science: the obvious, the avoidable and the thorny",
    abstract = "This chapter explores three blockages to relevance. The first argument rests on the observation that the use of research in the world of policy is prone to the play of politics and power and that the windows of opportunity for political science to demonstrate its relevance may therefore be relatively narrow and infrequent. This first blockage will come as no surprise to anyone in political science or in politics. The play of power in decision-making is a central feature in our mutual understanding of politics. The second explanation focuses more on the lack of incentives and organizational blockages experienced by those that prioritize relevance within the profession of political science, which in turn limit the numbers of those academics that seek to make their work obviously and directly relevant. This blockage is a product of the intended and unintended consequences of institutional and individual decisions made over the last few decades and which could be addressed by a different set of choices being made. It is, therefore, an avoidable blockage. The third blockage rests on thorny issues raised by the advocacy of relevance. These include the difficult issues of untangling matters of fact and value and more generally whether political scientists can offer evidence-based solutions and advice rather than explanations of ‘what is’. The first obstacle is something that has to be worked around, the second has to be confronted and the third puzzled about and hopefully addressed by new cadres of work that build on some pioneering examples",
    author = "Gerry STOKER",
    year = "2015",
    doi = "10.1007/978-1-137-50660-3_2",
    language = "English",
    isbn = "9780230201088",
    pages = "19--35",
    editor = "Gerry Stoker and Peters, {B Guy} and Jon Pierre",
    booktitle = "The Relevance of Political Science",
    publisher = "Palgrave Macmillan",
    address = "United Kingdom",

    }

    STOKER, G 2015, Challenging three blockages to relevance and political science: the obvious, the avoidable and the thorny. in G Stoker, BG Peters & J Pierre (eds), The Relevance of Political Science. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp. 19-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-50660-3_2

    Challenging three blockages to relevance and political science: the obvious, the avoidable and the thorny. / STOKER, Gerry.

    The Relevance of Political Science. ed. / Gerry Stoker; B Guy Peters; Jon Pierre. London : Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. p. 19-35.

    Research output: A Conference proceeding or a Chapter in BookChapter

    TY - CHAP

    T1 - Challenging three blockages to relevance and political science: the obvious, the avoidable and the thorny

    AU - STOKER, Gerry

    PY - 2015

    Y1 - 2015

    N2 - This chapter explores three blockages to relevance. The first argument rests on the observation that the use of research in the world of policy is prone to the play of politics and power and that the windows of opportunity for political science to demonstrate its relevance may therefore be relatively narrow and infrequent. This first blockage will come as no surprise to anyone in political science or in politics. The play of power in decision-making is a central feature in our mutual understanding of politics. The second explanation focuses more on the lack of incentives and organizational blockages experienced by those that prioritize relevance within the profession of political science, which in turn limit the numbers of those academics that seek to make their work obviously and directly relevant. This blockage is a product of the intended and unintended consequences of institutional and individual decisions made over the last few decades and which could be addressed by a different set of choices being made. It is, therefore, an avoidable blockage. The third blockage rests on thorny issues raised by the advocacy of relevance. These include the difficult issues of untangling matters of fact and value and more generally whether political scientists can offer evidence-based solutions and advice rather than explanations of ‘what is’. The first obstacle is something that has to be worked around, the second has to be confronted and the third puzzled about and hopefully addressed by new cadres of work that build on some pioneering examples

    AB - This chapter explores three blockages to relevance. The first argument rests on the observation that the use of research in the world of policy is prone to the play of politics and power and that the windows of opportunity for political science to demonstrate its relevance may therefore be relatively narrow and infrequent. This first blockage will come as no surprise to anyone in political science or in politics. The play of power in decision-making is a central feature in our mutual understanding of politics. The second explanation focuses more on the lack of incentives and organizational blockages experienced by those that prioritize relevance within the profession of political science, which in turn limit the numbers of those academics that seek to make their work obviously and directly relevant. This blockage is a product of the intended and unintended consequences of institutional and individual decisions made over the last few decades and which could be addressed by a different set of choices being made. It is, therefore, an avoidable blockage. The third blockage rests on thorny issues raised by the advocacy of relevance. These include the difficult issues of untangling matters of fact and value and more generally whether political scientists can offer evidence-based solutions and advice rather than explanations of ‘what is’. The first obstacle is something that has to be worked around, the second has to be confronted and the third puzzled about and hopefully addressed by new cadres of work that build on some pioneering examples

    U2 - 10.1007/978-1-137-50660-3_2

    DO - 10.1007/978-1-137-50660-3_2

    M3 - Chapter

    SN - 9780230201088

    SP - 19

    EP - 35

    BT - The Relevance of Political Science

    A2 - Stoker, Gerry

    A2 - Peters, B Guy

    A2 - Pierre, Jon

    PB - Palgrave Macmillan

    CY - London

    ER -

    STOKER G. Challenging three blockages to relevance and political science: the obvious, the avoidable and the thorny. In Stoker G, Peters BG, Pierre J, editors, The Relevance of Political Science. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 2015. p. 19-35 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-50660-3_2