【SSCI】教育学期刊《Minerva》最新论文推送（2024年11月）

《Minerva》共35篇，祝大家阅读愉快。

《Making Science Relevant: Comparing Two Science Advisory Organizations Beyond the Linear Knowledge Model》

《让科学成为现实: 两个超越线性知识模型的科学咨询机构的比较》

作者：Göran Sundqvist · Sebastian Linke

英文摘要：  This article compares two science advisory organizations: the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) and the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES), with a special focus on how their respective policy systems absorb the knowledge delivered for use in decision processes. The science-policy processes of these two organizations differ in important respects; ICES delivers highly specified knowledge to a specified uptake mechanism, while the IPCC produces unspecified knowledge for an unspecified uptake mechanism. Since both environmental governance areas are criticized for lack of needed action, a comparison is of interest asking how this might relate to the organization of science advice. As theoretical resources for this explorative comparison we utilize two approaches from the field of science and technology studies: the co-production approach, which focuses on the entanglements of scientific and political processes, and the systems-theory-oriented multiple-worlds model, which assumes a clear difference in institutional logics between the scientific and the political field. Since the IPCC has been critically analysed by several studies utilizing resources from the two approaches, we contribute with new insights by bringing in ICES, which is a much less studied organization exposing a different science-policy structure. One important finding is that the two theoretical approaches focus on different aspects, exposing ‘links’ and ‘integration’, both of which we argue are important for analysing and assessing science advisory organizations. Moreover, these aspects can be advantageously integrated into a single theoretical framework.

中文摘要： 这篇文章比较了两个科学咨询组织: 政府间气候变化专门委员会(IPCC)和国际海洋勘探理事会(ICES) ，特别关注他们各自的政策系统如何吸收在决策过程中使用的知识。这两个组织的科学政策进程在重要方面有所不同; 国际海洋考察理事会向特定的吸收机制提供高度特定的知识，而气专委则为特定的吸收机制提供未特定的知识。由于这两个环境治理领域都因缺乏必要的行动而受到批评，因此有必要进行比较，探讨这与科学咨询意见的组织有何关系。作为这种探索性比较的理论资源，我们利用了科学技术研究领域的两种方法: 注重科学和政治过程的纠缠的联合生产方法和以系统理论为导向的多世界模型，这两种方法在科学和政治领域的制度逻辑上有着明显的区别。由于若干研究利用这两种方法的资源对气专委进行了批判性分析，因此我们提出了新的见解，引入了 ICES，这是一个研究较少的组织，揭示了不同的科学政策结构。一个重要的发现是，这两种理论方法侧重于不同的方面，揭示“联系”和“整合”，我们认为这两者对于分析和评估科学咨询组织都很重要。此外，这些方面可以有利地整合成一个单一的理论框架。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09528-0

《The EUropeanisation of Research Infrastructure Policy》

《研究基础设施政策的欧洲化》

作者：Katharina Cramer · Nicolas Rüffin

英文摘要：  Political interest in Research Infrastructures on a European scale has been a new phenomenon, marked in the early 2000s with the launch of the Lisbon Strategy and the European Research Area. European Research Infrastructure policy then developed through, first, the strategic incorporation of incumbents through new modes of coordination; second, the European Commission’s emphasis of joint responsibility at the supranational level, claiming its own accountability and mobilizing the subsidiarity principle to its advantage; third, the incentivization of conformity to the European Commission’s policy agenda through generous financial schemes and fourth, the implementation of tailor-made legislation. While this topic speaks to current debates in EU studies, it also amends analyses of Big Science as an empirical puzzle within European politics and integration and launches a scholarly effort to come to terms with the new phenomenon of Research Infrastructures.

中文摘要： 欧洲规模的研究基础设施的政治利益已成为一种新现象，2000年代初启动了里斯本战略和欧洲研究区。随后，欧洲研究基础设施政策通过以下途径得以发展: 首先，通过新的协调模式，对现有机构进行战略整合; 其次，欧盟委员会强调在超国家层面上的共同责任，声称自己负有责任，并动员辅助原则，使之对自己有利; 第三，通过慷慨的金融计划，鼓励与欧盟委员会的政策议程保持一致; 第四，实施量身定制的立法。虽然这个话题涉及到当前欧盟研究中的争论，但它也修正了将大科学作为欧洲政治和一体化中的一个经验难题的分析，并发起了一项学术努力来适应研究基础设施这一新现象。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09544-0

《ing It All: The Soviet Institute of Scientific Information (VINITI) and the Promise of Centralisation, 1952–1977》

《摘录一切: 苏联科学信息研究所(VINITI)与集中化的承诺，1952-1977》

作者：Björn Hammarfelt · Johanna Dahlin

英文摘要：  In the aftermath of the Second World War, effective handling of scientific information was identified as crucial for advancement and international competitiveness. Here, we study how the Soviet Union, through the founding of The All-Union Institute for Scientific and Technical Information (VINITI), developed its own grandiose system which served researchers and engineers throughout the USSR. By studying its inception, the way it was structured, and how it relates to similar grand visions of how to organise knowledge, we provide rare insights into a partly alternative history of how scientific information was organised in the latter half of the 20th century. Based on available sources in English and Russian, we consider the ideas behind this grand initiative for acquiring international literature, as well as how it was received and presented to a foreign audience. In this effort, we put particular emphasis on the first 25 years of VINITI (1952–1977) while at the same time focusing on central ideas in its organisation such as “enrichment”, “ing” and “pre-printing”. A key principle emerging from our analysis is how the notion of concentration becomes a fundamental principle for its operations. Overall, the activities of VINITI can today appear as both old-fashioned, bordering on the utopian, and as visionary and modern in its abandonment of journals and traditional forms of peer review.

中文摘要： 在第二次世界大战之后，科学信息的有效处理被认为对于进步和国际竞争力至关重要。在这里，我们研究苏联是如何通过建立全联盟科学技术信息研究所(VINITI) ，发展出自己宏伟的系统，为整个苏联的研究人员和工程师服务的。通过研究它的起源，它的结构方式，以及它与如何组织知识的类似宏伟愿景之间的关系，我们提供了罕见的洞察力，让我们了解20世纪后半叶科学信息组织方式的部分不同历史。根据现有的英文和俄文资料来源，我们考虑了这一获取国际文学的重大倡议背后的想法，以及它是如何被接受并呈现给外国读者的。在这一努力中，我们特别强调 VINITI (1952-1977)的前25年，同时关注其组织中的核心理念，如“丰富”、“抽象”和“预印”。从我们的分析中出现的一个关键原则是集中概念如何成为其运作的一个基本原则。总的来说，VINITI 的活动今天看起来既过时、接近乌托邦，又具有远见和现代性，放弃了杂志和传统形式的同行评议。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09545-z

《Investigating Knowledge Flows in Scientific Communities: The Potential of Bibliometric Methods》

《调查科学界的知识流动: 文献计量方法的潜力》

作者：Valeria Aman · Jochen Gläser

英文摘要：  In their everyday work, scholars constantly acquire and transfer knowledge. Many of these knowledge flows are difficult to observe, not least because scholars are often not aware of them. This may be the reason why the attention to knowledge flows is very unevenly distributed across science studies, with bibliometric citation-based studies contributing the most research. Starting from the premise that bibliometric methods can be more readily exploited in the study of knowledge flows, this review explores the potential of bibliometric methods for the investigation of knowledge flows. Bibliometrics provides a portfolio of data and methods that can be used alone or in combination with qualitative methods to study knowledge flows. We organise contributions to the study of knowledge flows according to their object of study—formal, informal, or tacit knowledge—and according to the mode of flow—impersonal or interpersonal knowledge flow. The review shows that bibliometrics is strongly focused on the use of citation data for the investigation of impersonal flows of formal knowledge and has recently turned to the impersonal flow of informal knowledge via social media. In contrast, there are only few bibliometric studies that address interpersonal flows of knowledge. The review identifies an under-utilised potential of bibliometric methods and suggests some directions for future methodological development.

中文摘要： 在日常工作中，学者们不断地获取和传授知识。许多这样的知识流动是难以观察的，尤其是因为学者们往往没有意识到这一点。这可能是为什么对知识流的关注在科学研究中分布非常不均匀的原因，而文献计量学引文为基础的研究贡献了最多的研究。本文从文献计量学方法在知识流研究中的应用前提出发，探讨了文献计量学方法在知识流研究中的潜力。文献计量学提供了一系列的数据和方法，可以单独使用或与定性方法结合使用来研究知识流。我们根据知识流的研究对象ーー正式知识、非正式知识或隐性知识ーー以及非个人或人际知识流的流动方式，来组织对知识流研究的贡献。文献计量学强烈关注引文数据在正式知识非人格流动研究中的应用，最近转向通过社会媒体非正式知识非人格流动研究。相比之下，只有很少的文献计量学研究涉及知识的人际流动。审查发现了文献计量学方法未得到充分利用的潜力，并为未来的方法学发展提出了一些方向。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09542-2

《Surviving Science – Coping with Exit-Decisions in Physics and History》

《生存科学-应对物理学和历史学中的退出决定》

作者：Tim Fenkner · Jonas Gottschalk-Rayling

英文摘要：  Academic careers between the completion of a PhD and the acquisition of tenure are characterized by short term contracts, high levels of competition, and future uncertainty. Existing research indicates that uncertainty is a primary cause for postdocs in all disciplines to constantly question the continuation of their career. Despite this commonality between disciplines, we argue that future imaginations, coping strategies and ultimately the decision-making practices to exit or remain in academia differ in each discipline. Drawing from 60 qualitative interviews with physicists and historians, we compared imaginations of the labor market inside and outside of academia, as well as narratives on how they perceive their agency to exit or remain. Our data shows that imaginations of the labor market outside of academia, have considerable consequences for their sense of precarity and planning of career paths. We propose that the uniform concept of future uncertainty must be separated into ‘existential uncertainty’ and ‘secured uncertainty’, which more accurately reflect the problems postdocs are confronted with and the resulting coping strategies. While those who consider their uncertainty as existential either evoke narratives of survival to continue in adverse conditions or begin parallel careers as added security. Those who perceive their future as uncertain but generally secured rely either on their ability to decide when necessary or postpone the question indefinitely. These differences that correlate with our chosen disciplines have important implications for research quality as well as mental-health hazards and further our understanding of self-exploitation and precarity in academia.

中文摘要： 从完成博士学位到获得终身教职之间的学术拥有属性是短期合同、激烈的竞争和未来的不确定性。现有的研究表明，不确定性是所有学科的博士后不断质疑其职业生涯延续性的主要原因。尽管学科之间存在这种共性，但我们认为，每个学科在退出或留在学术界的未来想象力、应对策略以及最终的决策实践都是不同的。通过对物理学家和历史学家的60次定性访谈，我们比较了学术界内外对劳动力市场的想象，以及他们如何看待自己的机构退出或留下的叙述。我们的数据显示，学术界之外的劳动力市场的想象力，对他们的不稳定感和职业道路的规划有相当大的影响。我们认为，未来不确定性的统一概念必须分为“存在的不确定性”和“安全的不确定性”，这两个概念更准确地反映了博士后面临的问题和由此产生的应对策略。而那些认为自己的不确定性是存在的人，要么唤起在不利条件下继续生存的叙述，要么开始平行的职业生涯，作为额外的安全感。那些认为自己的未来不确定但一般有把握的人要么依靠自己在必要时作出决定的能力，要么无限期地推迟这个问题。这些与我们选择的学科相关的差异对研究质量以及心理健康危害具有重要影响，并进一步加深了我们对学术界自我剥削和不稳定性的理解。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09548-w

《Participatory Convergence: Integrating Convergence and Participatory Action Research》

《参与式融合: 融合融合与参与行动研究》

作者：Laura Castro-Díaz · Anaís Roque · Amber Wutich · Laura Landes · Wenwen Li · Rhett Larson · Paul Westerhoff · Mariana Marcos−Hernández · Mohammad Jobayer Hossain · Yushiou Tsai · Ramon Lucero · Gill Todd · Dave D. White · W. Michael Hanemann

英文摘要：  This paper introduces the concept of “Participatory Convergence” as a framework to meet grand social-ecological challenges. Participatory Convergence combines the principles of Convergence Research with Participatory Action Research (PAR), offering a novel approach to tackling complex societal problems. Convergence Research seeks to foster high-level integration between diverse disciplines to address multifaceted issues, emphasizing systems thinking and solutions orientation; however, existing literature falls short in providing practical models for the deep integration of diverse disciplines, community partners, and community members. This paper aims to bridge these gaps by integrating Convergence Research with PAR. We illustrate the application of Participatory Convergence with a case study: the “Action for Water Equity” project, focusing on water challenges faced by communities in U.S. colonias along the U.S.–Mexico border. The Action for Water Equity project is a practical example of how Participatory Convergence can be applied to tackle pressing challenges while embracing diversity, inclusivity, and adaptability. This approach holds the potential to facilitate comprehensive solutions for global challenges and foster meaningful change through interdisciplinary collaboration, community engagement, and a commitment to sustainability and equity.

中文摘要： 本文介绍了“参与性融合”的概念，作为一个框架，以应对宏大的社会生态挑战。参与式融合结合了融合研究和参与行动研究(PAR)的原则，为解决复杂的社会问题提供了一种新颖的方法。趋同研究旨在促进不同学科之间的高层次整合，以解决多方面的问题，强调系统思维和解决方案的导向; 然而，现有的文献在为不同学科、社区合作伙伴和社区成员的深度整合提供实用模型方面存在不足。本文旨在通过将收敛性研究与 PAR 相结合来弥补这些差距。我们以“水资源公平行动”项目为例说明参与式融合的应用，该项目关注美墨边境美国殖民地社区面临的水资源挑战。“水资源公平行动”项目是一个实际例子，说明如何利用参与性汇聚应对紧迫挑战，同时兼顾多样性、包容性和适应性。这种方法有可能促进全面解决全球挑战，并通过跨学科合作、社区参与以及致力于可持续性和公平促进有意义的变革。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09547-x

《The Rise of Global Health Emergency Governance》

《全球卫生紧急治理的兴起》

作者：Michael Rabi

英文摘要：  In this paper I shed new light on contemporary developments in global health governance, policymaking, and knowledge production. Specifically, by investigating the historical roots and emergence of global health emergency governance. Drawing on the Foucauldian notion of “problematisation” and on Science and Technology Studies of disaster, I trace, examine, and elucidate three main axes through which, I argue, health emergencies became a problem of global governance. I show, first, the formation of emergency management as a distinct professional field. Second, the migration of emergency management into global health governance and its proliferation within it. And third, the move from global health emergency management to the global governance of health emergencies. Overall, I suggest the rise of global health emergency governance provides crucial context for understanding social, political, and epistemic tensions and controversies in health emergencies such as COVID-19. Through the analysis, I identify a particular rationale that is rooted in emergency management and had become embedded in global health emergency governance. A rationale that involves “temporal compression” and “structural plasticity.” I discuss possible implications of this rationale for global health governance, policy, and knowledge.

中文摘要： 在本文中，我对全球卫生治理、决策和知识生产的当代发展提出了新的见解。具体来说，通过考察全球卫生突发事件治理的历史根源和产生过程。根据福柯的“问题化”概念和灾难的科学技术研究，我追踪、检查和阐明了三个主要轴心，我认为，通过这三个轴心，卫生突发事件成为了全球治理的问题。笔者首先展示了应急管理作为一个独特的专业领域的形成。第二，应急管理向全球卫生治理的转移及其在全球卫生治理中的扩散。第三，从全球卫生应急管理走向全球卫生应急管理。总体而言，我认为全球卫生紧急事件治理的兴起为理解社会、政治和认知紧张局势以及诸如2019冠状病毒疾病等卫生紧急事件中的争议提供了重要的背景。通过分析，我确定了一个植根于紧急情况管理并且已经嵌入全球卫生紧急情况治理的特定理论基础。一个涉及“时间压缩”和“结构可塑性”的基本原理我将讨论这一理论基础对全球卫生治理、政策和知识的可能影响。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09555-x

《All that Matters are Forests and Seas? Practising Relevance in Interdisciplinary Environment-Focused Social Science Fields》

《重要的是森林和海洋? 在以环境为中心的跨学科社会科学领域中的实践相关性》

作者：Susanne Koch · Judit Varga

英文摘要：  Policy increasingly requires societally relevant and interdisciplinary science, which prompts questions about science’s orientation to diverse academic and non-academic actors. This paper examines how relevance is practised and negotiated in two evolving interdisciplinary social science fields: marine social sciences and forest policy research. Both fields investigate human relations with specific environments: how people use, manage and govern, live with and value seas and forests. Diverse social and political actors have stakes in the knowledge these fields generate. To whose matters and stakes do researchers respond and orient their research? Are such orientations reflexively discussed and contested? To operationalise relevance, we employ the notion of ‘epistemic commitments’ while adopting a Bourdieusian perspective on scientific fields. Our analysis draws on conference observation, interviews and document analysis. We find diverse epistemic commitments in both fields, but see noticeable differences in their prevalence, reflexivity and contestation. Examining the fields’ socio-historical trajectories, we theorise that these differences are due to field-specific properties: their relative autonomy to negotiate relevance independently from other disciplines and external forces; and the field-specific habitus that impacts the degree to which relevance is a reflexive commitment, or an unconscious practice. The comparative analysis suggests that interdisciplinary scientific fields’ specific institutional histories and relations with societal and policy actors shape relevance practices and the extent to which these are internally contested.

中文摘要： 政策越来越需要社会相关性和跨学科的科学，这促使人们质疑科学对不同学术和非学术行为者的定位。本文探讨了在两个不断发展的跨学科社会科学领域——海洋社会科学和森林政策研究——如何实践和谈判相关性。这两个领域都研究人类与特定环境的关系: 人们如何使用、管理和治理海洋和森林，如何与海洋和森林共处，如何珍惜海洋和森林。这些领域产生的知识与各种社会和政治参与者息息相关。研究人员对谁的问题和利害关系作出回应并确定他们的研究方向？这些取向是否被本能地讨论和争论？为了使相关性具有可操作性，我们采用了“认知承诺”的概念，同时在科学领域采用了布尔迪厄的观点。我们的分析基于会议观察、访谈和文件分析。我们发现在这两个领域都有不同的认知承诺，但是在普遍性、反身性和争论性方面有明显的差异。通过研究这些领域的社会历史轨迹，我们得出结论: 这些差异是由领域特有的属性造成的: 它们相对独立于其他学科和外部力量来协商相关性的相对自主性; 以及领域特有的习惯，这些习惯影响了相关性是一种自反性承诺或无意识实践的程度。比较分析表明，跨学科科学领域的具体制度历史以及与社会和政策行为者的关系塑造了相关实践，以及这些实践在多大程度上受到内部争议。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09556-w

《Always Relevant? Finding a Place for the Social Sciences in the Technical University and the Business School》

《在技术大学和商学院中为社会科学找到一席之地》

作者：Alan Irwin · Maja Horst

英文摘要：  Relevance with regard to the social sciences can be presented as a new imposition from external stakeholders and an obligation imposed upon the individual researcher. As an alternative approach, we place relevance in a larger institutional but also historical perspective. Taking the case of two non-traditional locations for the social sciences, we suggest that ‘relevance’ has been actively constitutive of both institutions from the beginning—even if the definition and practice of relevance have been matters of discussion, change and contestation. In what we describe as a process of multi-layering, relevance has over time accumulated new meanings which can co-exist with older concerns. It follows that, even when universities express a commitment to relevance, the enactment of that commitment will be open to competing interpretations. Our account identifies an element of circularity as old issues return in new form. We also note that both the institutional past and organizational complexity can be overlooked within contemporary discussions. Relevance is not a static concept around which critical debate then circulates. Its contextuality, case-specificity and multi-dimensionality make it difficult to impose from above. Nevertheless, the shifting construction of its meaning and enactment provokes questions about the identity and purpose of both the social sciences and the universities.

中文摘要： 社会科学方面的相关性可以表现为外部利益攸关方的一种新的强加，以及强加给个别研究人员的一种义务。作为一种替代方法，我们把相关性放在一个更大的制度，但也是历史的角度。以社会科学的两个非传统场所为例，我们认为“相关性”从一开始就是这两个机构的积极组成部分ーー即使相关性的定义和实践一直是讨论、改变和争论的问题。在我们所描述的一个多层次的过程中，随着时间的推移，关联性积累了新的含义，这些含义可以与旧的关注点共存。由此可见，即使大学表达了对相关性的承诺，这种承诺的颁布也将面临相互矛盾的解释。我们的帐户确定了一个循环的元素，因为旧的问题以新的形式返回。我们还注意到，机构的过去和组织的复杂性在当代的讨论中都可以忽略。相关性不是一个静态的概念，然后围绕它进行批判性辩论。它的上下文关联性、个案特异性和多维性使它难以从上面强加。然而，社会科学的含义和制定方式的转变引发了关于社会科学和大学的身份和目的的问题。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09553-z

《Surviving Science – Coping with Exit-Decisions in Physics and History》

《生存科学-应对物理学和历史学中的退出决定》

作者：Tim Fenkner · Jonas Gottschalk-Rayling

英文摘要：  Academic careers between the completion of a PhD and the acquisition of tenure are characterized by short term contracts, high levels of competition, and future uncertainty. Existing research indicates that uncertainty is a primary cause for postdocs in all disciplines to constantly question the continuation of their career. Despite this commonality between disciplines, we argue that future imaginations, coping strategies and ultimately the decision-making practices to exit or remain in academia differ in each discipline. Drawing from 60 qualitative interviews with physicists and historians, we compared imaginations of the labor market inside and outside of academia, as well as narratives on how they perceive their agency to exit or remain. Our data shows that imaginations of the labor market outside of academia, have considerable consequences for their sense of precarity and planning of career paths. We propose that the uniform concept of future uncertainty must be separated into ‘existential uncertainty’ and ‘secured uncertainty’, which more accurately reflect the problems postdocs are confronted with and the resulting coping strategies. While those who consider their uncertainty as existential either evoke narratives of survival to continue in adverse conditions or begin parallel careers as added security. Those who perceive their future as uncertain but generally secured rely either on their ability to decide when necessary or postpone the question indefinitely. These differences that correlate with our chosen disciplines have important implications for research quality as well as mental-health hazards and further our understanding of self-exploitation and precarity in academia.

中文摘要： 从完成博士学位到获得终身教职之间的学术拥有属性是短期合同、激烈的竞争和未来的不确定性。现有的研究表明，不确定性是所有学科的博士后不断质疑其职业生涯延续性的主要原因。尽管学科之间存在这种共性，但我们认为，每个学科在退出或留在学术界的未来想象力、应对策略以及最终的决策实践都是不同的。通过对物理学家和历史学家的60次定性访谈，我们比较了学术界内外对劳动力市场的想象，以及他们如何看待自己的机构退出或留下的叙述。我们的数据显示，学术界之外的劳动力市场的想象力，对他们的不稳定感和职业道路的规划有相当大的影响。我们认为，未来不确定性的统一概念必须分为“存在的不确定性”和“安全的不确定性”，这两个概念更准确地反映了博士后面临的问题和由此产生的应对策略。而那些认为自己的不确定性是存在的人，要么唤起在不利条件下继续生存的叙述，要么开始平行的职业生涯，作为额外的安全感。那些认为自己的未来不确定但一般有把握的人要么依靠自己在必要时作出决定的能力，要么无限期地推迟这个问题。这些与我们选择的学科相关的差异对研究质量以及心理健康危害具有重要影响，并进一步加深了我们对学术界自我剥削和不稳定性的理解。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09548-w

《Investigating Knowledge Flows in Scientific Communities: The Potential of Bibliometric Methods》

《调查科学界的知识流动: 文献计量方法的潜力》

作者：Valeria Aman · Jochen Gläser

英文摘要：  In their everyday work, scholars constantly acquire and transfer knowledge. Many of these knowledge flows are difficult to observe, not least because scholars are often not aware of them. This may be the reason why the attention to knowledge flows is very unevenly distributed across science studies, with bibliometric citation-based studies contributing the most research. Starting from the premise that bibliometric methods can be more readily exploited in the study of knowledge flows, this review explores the potential of bibliometric methods for the investigation of knowledge flows. Bibliometrics provides a portfolio of data and methods that can be used alone or in combination with qualitative methods to study knowledge flows. We organise contributions to the study of knowledge flows according to their object of study—formal, informal, or tacit knowledge—and according to the mode of flow—impersonal or interpersonal knowledge flow. The review shows that bibliometrics is strongly focused on the use of citation data for the investigation of impersonal flows of formal knowledge and has recently turned to the impersonal flow of informal knowledge via social media. In contrast, there are only few bibliometric studies that address interpersonal flows of knowledge. The review identifies an under-utilised potential of bibliometric methods and suggests some directions for future methodological development.

中文摘要： 在日常工作中，学者们不断地获取和传授知识。许多这样的知识流动是难以观察的，尤其是因为学者们往往没有意识到这一点。这可能是为什么对知识流的关注在科学研究中分布非常不均匀的原因，而文献计量学引文为基础的研究贡献了最多的研究。本文从文献计量学方法在知识流研究中的应用前提出发，探讨了文献计量学方法在知识流研究中的潜力。文献计量学提供了一系列的数据和方法，可以单独使用或与定性方法结合使用来研究知识流。我们根据知识流的研究对象ーー正式知识、非正式知识或隐性知识ーー以及非个人或人际知识流的流动方式，来组织对知识流研究的贡献。文献计量学强烈关注引文数据在正式知识非人格流动研究中的应用，最近转向通过社会媒体非正式知识非人格流动研究。相比之下，只有很少的文献计量学研究涉及知识的人际流动。审查发现了文献计量学方法未得到充分利用的潜力，并为未来的方法学发展提出了一些方向。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09542-2

《Mapping for Mapping’s Sake? Ecosystems Services Maps and the Modes of (Ir)relevance of Ecological Knowledge for Nature Conservation》

《生态系统服务图和生态知识与自然保护的关联模式》

作者：Lucas Brunet

英文摘要：  In the face of enduring environmental decline, ecologists are continuously exploring new ways to improve the relevance of their research and address nature conservation issues. Hoping for more relevant solutions than former species-centered conservation, some ecologists have mapped ecosystems and the services they deliver to human societies. Maps offer crucial, but understudied, relevance-making tools. By proposing a relational conceptualisation of relevance, I demonstrate that maps can make issues simultaneously relevant and irrelevant for conservation. In two mapping projects conducted at the European Union level by the Working Group Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services and at the French regional scale by the Laboratoire d’Écologie Alpine, I investigate how the (ir)relevance of ecosystem services maps is enacted through different modes. I successively show that: ecologists employed maps to re-orient their research toward social issues, but were constrained by the available quantified data (mode A); they used maps to implement a biopolitical approach and decide which ecosystems to protect, yet grappled with the imprecision of maps (mode B); and they engaged stakeholders in map development, but had to make excessive adjustments to align with their demands (mode C). I conclude by arguing that ecosystem services maps exemplify an automation of relevance, where relevance is more conditioned by technical feasibility than by the conceptualisation of solutions to conservation issues. Ultimately, the article contributes to the relevance scholarship by advancing the concept of irrelevance, operationalising the study of modes of relevance, and demonstrating that relevance is an inherently relational process.

中文摘要： 面对持续的环境恶化，生态学家不断探索新的方法，以提高其研究的相关性，并解决自然保护问题。一些生态学家希望找到比以前以物种为中心的保护更相关的解决方案，他们已经绘制了生态系统及其为人类社会提供的服务的地图。地图提供了至关重要但尚未被充分研究的相关性制造工具。通过提出相关性的关系概念，我证明了地图可以使问题同时与保护相关和无关。在由欧盟生态系统及其服务测绘与评估工作组和法国阿尔卑斯生态学实验室在法国区域范围内进行的两个测绘项目中，我研究了生态系统服务地图是如何通过不同的模式制定的。我先后指出: 生态学家使用地图重新定位他们的研究面向社会问题，但受到现有量化数据(模式 A)的限制; 他们使用地图实施生物政治方法，决定哪些生态系统需要保护，但与地图的不精确性(模式 B)作斗争; 他们让利益相关者参与地图开发，但不得不做出过多的调整，以符合他们的要求(模式 C)。最后，我认为，生态系统服务地图体现了相关性的自动化，相关性更多地取决于技术可行性，而不是保护问题解决方案的概念化。最后，本文通过提出非相关性的概念，将相关性模式的研究付诸实践，并证明相关性是一个内在的关系过程，从而为相关性学术做出了贡献。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09552-0

《Claiming Relevance for Social Science and the Humanities: Relevance Expressions Across Methodological Divides》

《社会科学与人文学科的关联主张: 跨越方法论鸿沟的关联表达》

作者：Tomas Hellström · Merle Jacob

英文摘要：  This article addresses the issue of how Social Science and Humanities (SSH) researchers frame and argue relevance, where there are no explicit expectations to do so. It uses research project reports submitted to a Swedish research council, to distil and further analyze ‘relevance expressions’. These expressions illustrate some methodological differences along the lines of the long-standing distinction between nomothetic (generalization oriented) and idiographic (case /description oriented). We extracted relevance claims from a database of project s and reports from the following fields: History, Linguistics, Political Science and Psychology. We interrogated these statements for possible differences with respect to how relevance is expressed. The study finds differences in the way that nomothetic and idiographic expressions imply, argue or derive support for relevance, and that these may be somewhat associated with fields, although with certain qualifications. Importantly, relevance expressions can be viewed as epistemic operations that occur in degrees of concretization, broadly or narrowly formulated, and in different levels of everyday and technical expressions. A key insight is that relevance in SSH appears to be closely associated with the way subjects relate to the empirical. This ultimately lends support for the application of the nomothetic/idiographic as a conceptual, albeit not exhaustive, analytical approach to understanding the relevance of SSH.

中文摘要： 本文讨论的问题是社会科学与人文学科(SSH)的研究人员如何框架和争论相关性，在没有明确的期望这样做。它利用提交给瑞典研究委员会的研究项目报告，提炼并进一步分析“相关表达式”。这些表述体现了一些方法论上的差异，这些差异体现在长期以来法理(概括导向)和具体(案例/描述导向)之间的区别上。我们从以下领域的项目 和报告数据库中提取了相关主张: 历史学、语言学、政治学和心理学。我们对这些陈述进行了审查，以便了解在如何表达相关性方面可能存在的差异。这项研究发现，名词性和具体表达方式的差异意味着，争论或推导支持的关联性，这些可能是有关的领域，虽然有一定的限制。重要的是，关联表达可以被视为具体化程度的认知操作，广义或狭义的表述，并在不同层次的日常和技术表达。一个关键的见解是，SSH 中的相关性似乎与受试者与经验主义相关的方式密切相关。这最终支持将法理/具体法作为一种概念性的(尽管不是详尽的)分析方法来理解 SSH 的相关性。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09561-z

《Mapping the German Diamond Open Access Journal Landscape》

《德国钻石开放获取期刊地图》

作者：Niels Taubert · Linda Sterzik · André Bruns

英文摘要：  In the current scientific and political discourse surrounding the transformation of the scientific publication system, significant attention is focused on Diamond Open Access (OA). Diamond OA is characterized by no charges for readers or authors and relies on monetary allowances and voluntary work. This article explores the potential and challenges of Diamond OA journals, using Germany as a case study. Two key questions are addressed: first, the current role of such journals in the scientific publication system is determined through bibliometric analysis across various disciplines. Second, an investigation is conducted to assess the sustainability of Diamond OA journals and identify associated structural problems or potential breaking points. This investigation includes an in-depth expert interview study involving 20 editors of Diamond OA journals. The empirical results are presented using a landscape map that considers two dimensions: 'monetized and gift-based completion of tasks' and 'journal team size.' The bibliometric analysis reveals a substantial number of Diamond OA journals in the social sciences and humanities, but limited adoption in other fields. The model proves effective for small to mid-sized journals, but not for larger ones. Additionally, it was found that 23 Diamond OA journals have recently discontinued their operations. The expert interviews demonstrate the diversity within the landscape and the usefulness of the two dimensions in understanding key differences. Journals in two of the four quadrants of the map exemplify sustainable conditions, while the other two quadrants raise concerns about long-term stability. These concerns include limited funding leading to a lack of division of labor and an excessive burden on highly committed members. Gift-like contributions, while appealing, also present challenges as potential donors not only decide whether to contribute but also how to contribute, potentially creating friction between the gift and the journal's requirements. Furthermore, journals in the lower right quadrant often rely on third-party funding, necessitating a transformation once the funding expires. Common pathways for sustaining operations include lobbying for funding at the journal's home institution or increasing reliance on gift-based completion of tasks. These findings underscore the need for the development of more sustainable funding models to ensure the success of Diamond OA journals.

中文摘要： 在当前围绕科技出版体制转型的科学政治话语中，钻石开放获取(OA)受到了极大的关注。钻石办公室不向读者或作者收取任何拥有属性，并依靠金钱津贴和志愿工作。本文以德国为例，探讨了钻石 OA 期刊的发展潜力和面临的挑战。提出了两个关键问题: 第一，通过跨学科的文献计量学分析，确定了这些期刊在科学出版系统中目前的作用。其次，进行了一项调查，以评估钻石 OA 期刊的可持续性，并确定相关的结构问题或潜在的突破点。这项调查包括一项深入的专家访谈研究，涉及钻石 OA 杂志的20名编辑。实证研究的结果是使用一个景观地图，考虑两个维度: “货币化和礼物为基础的任务完成”和“期刊团队规模。”文献计量分析显示，社会科学和人文科学领域有相当数量的钻石 OA 期刊，但在其他领域采用有限。该模型被证明对中小型期刊有效，但对大型期刊无效。此外，还发现23家钻石 OA 杂志最近停止了它们的业务。专家访谈显示了情况的多样性，以及这两个层面在理解关键差异方面的有用性。地图四个象限中有两个象限的期刊展示了可持续条件，而另外两个象限则提出了对长期稳定性的关注。这些问题包括资金有限导致缺乏分工和高度负责的成员负担过重。类似礼物的捐赠虽然很吸引人，但也带来了挑战，因为潜在的捐赠者不仅要决定是否捐赠，还要决定如何捐赠，这可能会在礼物和杂志的要求之间造成摩擦。此外，右下象限的期刊通常依赖第三方资助，一旦资助到期，就必须进行转型。维持运营的常见途径包括游说杂志所在机构提供资金，或者增加对基于礼物完成任务的依赖。这些调查结果强调，需要制定更可持续的供资模式，以确保钻石办公自动化杂志的成功。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-023-09519-7

《Structural Power and Epistemologies in the Scientific Field: Why a Rapid Reconciliation Between Functional and Evolutionary Biology is Unlikely》

《科学领域的结构力量和认识论: 为什么功能生物学和进化生物学不可能快速协调》

作者：Pierre Benz · Félix Bühlmann

英文摘要：  The past decade has been marked by a series of global crises, presenting an opportunity to reevaluate the relationship between science and politics. The biological sciences are instrumental in understanding natural phenomena and informing policy decisions. However, scholars argue that current scientific expertise often fails to account for entire populations and long-term impacts, hindering efforts to address issues such as biodiversity loss, global warming, and pandemics. This article explores the structural challenges of integrating an evolutionary perspective, historically opposed to functional determinants of health and disease, into current biological science practices. Using data on Swiss biology professors from 1957, 1980, and 2000, we examine the structural power dynamics that have led to the division between these competing epistemologies, and how this division has influenced resource allocation and career trajectories. Our analysis suggests that this cleavage presents a significant obstacle to achieving fruitful reconciliations, and that increased academicization and internationalization may benefit functional biologists at the expense of evolutionary biologists. While evolutionary biologists have gained symbolic recognition in recent years, this has not translated into valuable expertise in the political domain.

中文摘要： 过去十年的特点是发生了一系列全球危机，这为重新评估科学与政治之间的关系提供了机会。生物科学有助于理解自然现象和为政策决策提供信息。然而，学者们认为，目前的科学专业知识往往没有考虑到整个人口和长期影响，阻碍了解决生物多样性丧失、全球变暖和流行病等问题的努力。本文探讨的结构性挑战，整合进化的观点，历史上反对功能性决定因素的健康和疾病，到目前的生物科学实践。利用1957年、1980年和2000年瑞士生物学教授的数据，我们研究了导致这些相互竞争的认识论之间分歧的结构性权力动态，以及这种分歧如何影响资源分配和职业轨迹。我们的分析表明，这种分裂是实现富有成效的和解的一个重大障碍，增加的学术化和国际化可能有利于功能生物学家，而牺牲进化生物学家。虽然近年来进化生物学家获得了象征性的认可，但这并没有转化为政治领域的宝贵专业知识。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-023-09520-0

《Evaluation Practices of Doctoral Examination Committees: Boundary-Work Under Pressure》

《博士生考试委员会评估实践: 压力下的边界工作》

作者：Maja Elmgren · Åsa Lindberg-Sand · Anders Sonesson

英文摘要：  The doctorate forms the basis for academic careers and the regeneration of academia, and has increasingly become important for other sectors of society. The latter is reflected in efforts on institutional, national as well as supranational levels to change and adapt the doctoral degree to new expectations. As doctoral education is embedded in research, changes in governance and funding of research further affect the doctorate. The evaluation of the doctoral thesis appears, however, to have remained true to the academic tradition: an examination committee exercising their gatekeeping in a ceremonial setting. This study sets out to explore doctoral examination committees’ evaluation practices. Insights were gained through six focus group interviews with experienced examination committee members at three large research-intensive universities in Sweden. Of particular interest is how the object of evaluation is formed, the nature of the boundary-work conducted, and variations in examination practices related to different and changing conditions for research and doctoral education. Our results show how the object of evaluation emerges through a gradual interpretation of the thesis and defence, becoming more complex and nuanced as the process of evaluation progresses from its initial stages to the final closed discussions of the committee. The finalised object of evaluation, only fully present at the conclusion of the closed meeting and hence transient in nature, encompasses the research contribution, educational achievement, and academic competence of the candidate. Furthermore, the boundary-work conducted in this process often transcends the object of evaluation to include also supervision and the local context for doctoral education and research, and hence contributes to upholding, and potential changing, norms in research fields, educational contexts, and academia at large. This extended boundary-work intensified as problems and inconsistencies were discovered during the evaluation process. The ceremonial staging underscored the gravity of the decision and the extended boundary-work. Despite changing conditions for the doctorate, our findings highlight the importance of the practice of evaluation committees, and the disciplinary communities to which they belong, for upholding and negotiating norms in academia.

中文摘要： 博士学位构成了学术生涯和学术复兴的基础，并且对社会其他部门越来越重要。后者反映在机构、国家和超国家各级为改变和调整博士学位以适应新的期望而作出的努力。随着博士教育深入研究，治理和研究经费的变化进一步影响博士学位。然而，对博士论文的评估似乎仍然忠实于学术传统: 一个考试委员会在一个仪式性的场合行使他们的把关职能。本研究旨在探讨博士生考试委员会的评审实务。通过与瑞典三所大型研究密集型大学经验丰富的考试委员会成员进行六次焦点小组访谈，获得了深刻见解。特别令人感兴趣的是评价对象是如何形成的、所进行的边界工作的性质以及与研究和博士教育不同和不断变化的条件有关的考试做法的差异。我们的研究结果表明，评价对象是如何通过对论点和答辩的逐步解释而产生的，随着评价过程从最初阶段进展到委员会最后的闭门讨论，评价对象变得更加复杂和微妙。最终的评估对象，只有在闭门会议结束时才能完全呈现，因此在性质上是短暂的，包括候选人的研究贡献、教育成就和学术能力。此外，在这个过程中进行的边界工作往往超越了评估的目标，还包括博士教育和研究的监督和当地背景，因此有助于维护和潜在的变化，研究领域，教育背景和学术界的规范。由于在评价过程中发现了问题和不一致之处，这种扩展的边界工作加剧了。仪式的举行突出了这一决定的严重性和扩大边界工作。尽管博士学位的条件不断变化，但我们的研究结果突出了评估委员会及其所属学科群体在学术界维护和协商规范方面的重要性。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09523-5

《Citation Elites in Polytheistic and Umbrella Disciplines: Patterns of Stratification and Concentration in Danish and British Science》

《多神论和伞形学科的引文精英: 丹麦和英国科学中的分层和集中模式》

作者：Alexander Kladakis · Philippe Mongeon · Carter Bloch

英文摘要：  The notion of science as a stratified system is clearly manifested in the markedly uneven distribution of productivity, rewards, resources, and recognition. Although previous studies have shown that institutional environments for conducting research differ significantly between national science systems, disciplines, and subfields, it remains to be shown whether any systematic variations and patterns in inequalities exist among researchers in different national and domain specific settings. This study investigates the positioning of citation elites as opposed to ‘ordinary’ researchers by way of examining three dimensions of concentration (accumulation of publications and citations, specialisation, and institutional concentration) in biology, economics and physics in Denmark and the UK. Across all three dimensions, we put Richard Whitley’s bipartite theory to the test, suggesting a nexus between the intellectual structure of a discipline and the configuration of its elite. The study draws on a dataset of researchers who published most of their publications in either physics, biology, or economics over the 1980–2018 period and with at least one publication in 2017–2018 while affiliated to either a British or a Danish university. We find higher degrees of concentration in the UK compared to Denmark, and that physics and biology respectively display the greatest and lowest degree of concentration. Similar patterns in disciplinary differences are observed in both countries, suggesting that concentration patterns are largely rooted in disciplinary cultures and merely amplified by the national context.

中文摘要： 科学作为一个分层系统的概念清楚地表现在生产力、回报、资源和认可的明显不均衡分配上。虽然以前的研究表明，开展研究的体制环境在国家科学系统、学科和分领域之间存在显著差异，但在不同国家和特定领域的研究人员之间是否存在任何系统性差异和不平等模式仍有待证明。这项研究通过检查丹麦和英国生物学，经济学和物理学中的三个集中维度(出版物和引文的积累，专业化和机构集中)来调查引文精英与“普通”研究人员的定位。纵观所有三个维度，我们将理查德 · 惠特利的二元理论付诸实践，提出了一门学科的知识结构与其精英结构之间的联系。这项研究利用了一组研究人员的数据，这些研究人员在1980年至2018年期间发表了物理学、生物学或经济学方面的大部分论文，在2017年至2018年期间至少发表了一篇论文，同时隶属于英国或丹麦的一所大学。我们发现英国的浓度高于丹麦，物理学和生物学分别表现出最高和最低的浓度。在这两个国家都观察到类似的学科差异模式，表明集中模式在很大程度上根植于学科文化，只是因国情而扩大。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09521-7

《Political Speech on Campus: Shifting the Emphasis from “if” to “how”》

《校园政治演讲: 从“如果”到“如何”》

作者：Mario Clemens · Christian Hochmuth

英文摘要：  Universities in many liberal democracies, such as the US, the UK, or Germany, grapple with a pivotal question: how much room should be given to controversial utterances? On the one side, there are those who advocate for limiting permissible speech on campus to create a safe environment for a diverse student body and counter the mainstreaming of extremist views, particularly by right-wing populists. On the other side, concerns arise about stifling the free exchange of ideas and creating an atmosphere of fear and censorship. The debate is further complicated by participants’ occasional uncertainties about the legal norms relevant in the given context, such as when freedom of speech is an issue and when it is not. This paper addresses the question of whether universities should allow actors with primarily political (as opposed to scholarly) agendas to speak on campus. Focusing on German universities, we begin by discussing some of the potentially relevant legal norms. We then propose shifting emphasis from whether we should make room for public political discussions on campus to how such events must be organized so that they deliver the goods that their advocates emphasize while avoiding the dangers of which critics warn. Drawing on conflict management literature concerned with process design, we make several practical suggestions on how to organize an event that brings political discourse to the university campus without causing harm.

中文摘要： 许多自由民主国家(如美国、英国或德国)的大学都在努力解决一个关键问题: 应该给有争议的言论留多少空间？一方面，有人主张限制在校园内允许的言论，以便为多样化的学生群体创造一个安全的环境，并反对极端主义观点的主流化，尤其是右翼民粹主义者的主流化。另一方面，人们担心扼杀思想的自由交流，制造恐惧和审查的气氛。参与者偶尔对特定背景下相关法律规范的不确定性，例如何时言论自由是一个问题，何时不是，使得这场辩论进一步复杂化。本文讨论的问题是，大学是否应该允许主要带有政治(而不是学术)议程的行为者在校园里发言。关于德国大学，我们首先讨论一些潜在的相关法律规范。然后，我们建议将重点从是否应该为校园内的公开政治讨论留出空间，转移到如何组织这类活动，以便它们传递倡导者所强调的好处，同时避免批评者警告的危险。借鉴与过程设计有关的冲突管理文献，对如何组织一次能够在不造成危害的情况下给大学校园带来政治话语的活动提出了几点实际建议。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09525-3

《An Uneasy Peace: How STEM Progressive, Traditionalist, and Bridging Faculty Understand Campus Conflicts over Diversity, Anti-Racism, and Free Expression》

《一个不安的和平: STEM 进步，传统，和桥梁教师如何理解校园冲突的多样性，反种族主义和自由表达》

作者：Steven Brint · Michael K. Webb · Ben Fields

英文摘要：  In recent years an uneasy peace has descended in U.S. academe between those who feel research universities have done too little to advance the representation of minority groups and women and those who feel that the administrative policies developed to improve representation can and sometimes do come into conflict with core intellectual commitments of universities. Using quantitative and qualitative evidence from interviews with 47 natural sciences, engineering, and mathematics faculty members at a U.S. research university, the paper examines the background characteristics of three sets of protagonists - academic progressives, academic traditionalists, and those whose views bridge the divide - and the way respondents discussed and justified their viewpoints. The paper draws on the theory of strategic action fields to illuminate the structure and dynamics of the conflict and suggests modifications to the theory that would improve its explanatory power for this case.

中文摘要： 近年来，美国学术界出现了一种令人不安的和平局面: 一方认为研究型大学在提高少数群体和妇女代表性方面做得太少，另一方则认为为提高代表性而制定的行政政策可能会、有时确实会与大学的核心知识承诺发生冲突。通过对美国一所研究型大学47名自然科学、工程学和数学教师的访谈，本文采用定量和定性的证据，分析了三组主角的背景特征——学术进步人士、学术传统主义者和那些弥合分歧的观点——以及受访者讨论和证明自己观点的方式。本文借鉴了战略行动领域的理论，阐明了冲突的结构和动态，并建议对这一理论进行修改，以改善其在这一情况下的解释力。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-023-09517-9

《Mapping Approaches to ‘Citizen Science’ and ‘Community Science’ and Everything In-between: The Evolution of New Epistemic Territory?》

《“公民科学”和“社区科学”的映射方法及其间的一切: 新认识领域的演变？》

作者：Nick Hacking · Jamie Lewis · Robert Evans

英文摘要：  Over the last decade or so, the rate of growth of academic publications involving discussion of ‘citizen science’ and ‘community science’, and similar variants, has risen exponentially. These fluid terms, with no fixed definition, cover a continuum of public participation within a range of scientific activities. It is, therefore, apposite and timely to examine the evolving typologies of citizen science and community science and to ask how particular disciplinary actors are shaping content and usage. Do certain approaches to citizen science and community science activity remain siloed within specific disciplines or do some approaches resonate more widely? In this study, we use mixed methods—bibliometric and textual analysis—to chart the changing academic interpretations of this scientific activity over time. We then ask what these analyses mean for the future direction of academic research into citizen science and community science. The results suggest that, while certain disciplinary-based interpretations have been particularly influential in the past, a more epistemically mixed array of academic interests than was previously evident are currently determining expectations of what citizen science and community science should look like and what they can be expected to deliver.

中文摘要： 在过去十年左右的时间里，涉及“公民科学”和“社区科学”以及类似变体讨论的学术出版物的增长速度呈指数级增长。这些流动的术语，没有固定的定义，涵盖了一系列科学活动中公众参与的连续性。因此，审查公民科学和社区科学不断演变的类型，并询问特定的学科行为者是如何塑造内容和用法的，是恰当和及时的。公民科学和社区科学活动的某些方法是否仍然局限于特定学科，或者某些方法是否更广泛地产生共鸣？在这项研究中，我们使用混合的方法ーー文献计量和文本分析ーー来描绘这项科学活动随着时间的推移而不断变化的学术解释。然后我们问这些分析对于未来公民科学和社区科学的学术研究方向意味着什么。研究结果表明，虽然某些基于学科的解释在过去特别有影响力，但是比以前更明显的认知混合的学术兴趣正在决定对公民科学和社区科学应该是什么样子以及它们可以被期望提供什么的期望。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09529-z

《What is the Space for “Place” in Social Studies of Astronomy?》

《天文社会研究中的“场所”空间是什么？》

作者：Raquel Velho · Michael Gastrow · C. Mason · Marina Ulguim · Yoliswa Sikhosana

英文摘要：  All large-scale telescope facilities are constructed within a geographical, social, historical, and political context that includes nested layers at the global, national, and local levels. However, discussions about the geographic siting of astronomy facilities, for example, the communities in which they are embedded or the interactions between the facility and its locale, are uncommon in social science studies of astronomy, and no extant review focused on this gap in the literature. In this literature review and discourse analysis, we explore the ways in which research about astronomy facilities and their local communities has emerged, and the extent to which it focuses on the Global South. We find that literature addressing the social and policy aspects of astronomy facilities has an emphasis on the Global North. However, literature addressing host communities has an emphasis on the Global South. Broadly, the discourses related to host communities in the Global South have emerged from reflections on the controversies related to large-scale telescopes in Hawai’i, Chile, and South Africa. One common theme linking these discourses is that a focus on benefits at the national and international levels obscures a range of problematic power dynamics and outcomes at the local level. The notion of the Global South as an ‘empty space’ in which astronomical observation does not constitute impactful action amongst local communities, is challenged by discourses that centre local contexts, and challenged by discourses that employ conceptual frameworks with a focus on revealing power dynamics.

中文摘要： 所有大型望远镜设施都是在地理、社会、历史和政治背景下建造的，其中包括全球、国家和地方各级的嵌套层。然而，在天文学的社会科学研究中，关于天文设施的地理位置的讨论，例如，它们所在的社区或者设施与其所在地之间的相互作用，是不常见的，而且没有现成的评论关注文献中的这种差距。在这篇文献回顾和篇章分析中，我们探讨了关于天文设施及其当地社区的研究出现的方式，以及它在多大程度上集中于全球南部。我们发现，有关天文设施的社会和政策方面的文献都强调全球北方。然而，针对东道国社区的文献强调的是全球南方。从广义上讲，有关全球南部地区寄主社区的论述，是从对夏威夷、智利和南非大型望远镜争议的反思中产生的。将这些论述联系起来的一个共同主题是，侧重于国家和国际一级的利益掩盖了地方一级一系列有问题的权力动态和结果。全球南部是一个“空白的空间”，在这个空间里，天文观测在当地社区并不构成有影响力的行动，这个概念受到了以当地语境为中心的话语的挑战，也受到了以揭示权力动态为中心的概念框架的话语的挑战。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09527-1

《From Effects of Governance to Causes of Epistemic Change》

《从治理效果到认识变化的原因》

作者：Jochen Gläser

英文摘要：  In this paper I argue that the attempts by science studies to identify epistemic effects of new governance instruments have largely failed. I suggest two main reasons for this failure. The first reason is that neither quantitative nor qualitative studies of effects of governance instruments meet the respective methodological standards for establishing causality. While much of this could be repaired, the second reason is more severe: given the complex causal web between governance and knowledge production and the multi-level nature of causation, a strategy that starts from a particular governance instrument and tries to identify its effects cannot work. I propose to reverse this strategy by starting from the observation of epistemic change and applying a strategy of “causal reconstruction” (Mayntz), which identifies the causes of this epistemic change and among them the contribution by governance. This approach has the advantage of starting from well-identified change. Challenges posed by the new approach include the empirical identification of epistemic change and the need to integrate sociological methods in science policy studies.

中文摘要： 在本文中，我认为，科学研究试图确定新的治理工具的认知效应已经基本上失败。我建议这种失败的两个主要原因。第一个原因是，对治理工具效果的定量和定性研究都不符合确定因果关系的各自方法标准。虽然其中大部分可以修复，但第二个原因更为严重: 鉴于治理和知识生产之间复杂的因果关系网以及因果关系的多层次性质，从某一特定治理工具出发并试图确定其影响的战略是行不通的。我建议通过从观察认知变化入手，运用“因果重建”(Mayntz)策略来逆转这一策略，该策略确定了这一认知变化的原因，其中包括治理的贡献。这种方法的优点是可以从已识别的变更开始。新方法带来的挑战包括认识变化的实证鉴定和将社会学方法纳入科学政策研究的必要性。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09526-2

《The Persistence of Gender Inequality in e-Science: The Case of eSec》

《电子科学中性别不平等的持续存在: 电子安全的案例》

作者：Öznur Karakaş

英文摘要：  E-science, or networked, collaborative and multidisciplinary scientific research on a shared e-infrastructure using computational tools, methods and applications, has also brought about new networked organizational forms in the transition of higher education towards the entrepreneurial academy. While the under-representation of women in ICTs is well-recorded, it is also known that the potential of new organizational forms such as networked structures to promote gender equality remains ambiguous, as they tend to perpetuate already existing inequalities due to their embeddedness in larger and longer-term structural or institutional gender effects. Based on a year-long ethnographic study in a networked academic e-science collaboration in Sweden and 45 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with its affiliated researchers, this article analyzes the multi-level obstacles to achieving gender equality in e-science to highlight the ways in which gendered disparities persist in this new, project-based academic networked organization in Sweden, hereafter called eSec. At the organizational level eSec remains deeply embedded in the traditional disciplinary and institutional academic setting, inadvertently reproducing existing gender imbalances across sciences. Furthermore, as a project-based organization, it is also embedded in the shift towards an entrepreneurial university model driven by new managerialism, the latter having a well-documented adverse effect in gender equality. This represents a structural-level obstacle which leads to especially female junior faculty leaving academy for industry. An individual level obstacle is observed alongside these as disavowal (Verleugnung) of gender disparities, an affect identified as a key mechanism of subjectivation in neoliberalism.

中文摘要： 电子科学，即利用计算工具、方法和应用程序对共享的电子基础设施进行的联网、协作和多学科科学研究，也在高等教育向创业学院过渡的过程中带来了新的联网组织形式。虽然妇女在信息和通信技术中代表性不足的情况屡见不鲜，但人们也知道，网络结构等新的组织形式在促进两性平等方面的潜力仍然模糊不清，因为它们往往会使已经存在的不平等现象长期存在下去，因为它们深深植根于更大和更长期的结构性或体制性两性平等影响之中。基于对瑞典一个网络化学术电子科学合作项目进行的为期一年的人种学研究，以及对其附属研究人员进行的45次深入、半结构化的访谈，本文分析了在电子科学领域实现性别平等的多层次障碍，以强调在瑞典这个新的、以项目为基础的学术网络化组织(以下简称 eSec)中性别差异持续存在的方式。在组织一级，电子经济学仍然深深植根于传统的学科和机构学术环境中，无意中在各科学领域重现了现有的性别不平衡。此外，作为一个以项目为基础的组织，它还深深植根于由新的管理主义驱动的向创业型大学模式的转变，后者对两性平等产生了有据可查的不利影响。这是一个结构层面的障碍，导致特别是女性初级教师离开学院从事工业。个人层面的障碍与性别差异的否认(Verleugnung)一起被观察到，这种影响被认为是新自由主义主观性的一个关键机制。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09530-6

《Environmental Care: How Marine Scientists Relate to Environmental Changes》

《环境保护: 海洋科学家与环境变化的关系》

作者：Sarah Maria Schönbauer

英文摘要：  Marine scientists have reported drastic environmental changes in marine and polar regions as a result of climate change. The changes range from species compositions in coastal regions and the deep-sea floor, the degradation of water and ice quality to the ever-growing plastic pollution affecting marine habitats. Marine scientists study these changes in their fieldwork, and communicate their findings in scientific publications. Some also rally in protests for the necessity of political programs to tackle changes. Based on ethnographic visits and interviews with marine scientists, this study examines how marine scientists experience and act on environmental changes as individuals and as collectives. In order to analyze their experiences and actions, I use the notion of care and portray care in different times and spaces, from work to protest. I demonstrate how care needs to be situated in different times and spaces, how care is embedded in a complex relationship of institutional requirements and structural demands that researchers experience, but also how care receives institutionalization and has an impact on research interests and agendas. In doing so, I show the social and epistemic consequences of care, opening up a view of individual and collective care in the marine sciences.

中文摘要： 海洋科学家报告说，由于气候变化，海洋和极地地区的环境发生了剧烈变化。这些变化包括沿海地区和深海海底的物种组成、水和冰质的退化以及影响海洋生境的日益严重的塑料污染。海洋科学家在他们的实地工作中研究这些变化，并在科学出版物中交流他们的发现。一些人还集会抗议政治计划应对变革的必要性。本研究以人种学访问和对海洋科学家的访谈为基础，探讨海洋科学家作为个人和集体如何体验和应对环境变化。为了分析他们的经历和行为，我运用了关怀的概念，描绘了从工作到抗议的不同时空中的关怀。我展示了护理需要如何处于不同的时间和空间，护理如何嵌入研究人员所经历的机构要求和结构性要求的复杂关系，以及护理如何接受机构化并对研究兴趣和议程产生影响。通过这样做，我展示了关怀的社会和认知后果，在海洋科学中开辟了个人和集体关怀的观点。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09538-y

《Could I Write Like Carol Weiss?》

《我能像 Carol Weiss 那样写作吗？》

作者：Øyunn Syrstad Høydal

英文摘要：  Academic papers in the social sciences were once more essayistic in their form. The carefree launching of concepts and ideas of academic value were the order of the day, all without the security of the present standardized paper format inspired by the natural sciences. This text draws on the most cited paper by the acclaimed scholar Carol Weiss, as an outset to discussing academic writing; why we write as we do and what we may lose by doing so. This means exploring the history of academic writing as well as discussing the complex, yet exciting, relationship between writing, identity, language, and the very process of conducting research.

中文摘要： 社会科学的学术论文再次以散文的形式出现。无忧无虑地提出具有学术价值的概念和思想成了当时的流行趋势，所有这些都没有目前受自然科学启发的标准化论文格式的安全性。本文引用了著名学者卡罗尔 · 韦斯(Carol Weiss)引用次数最多的一篇论文，作为讨论学术写作的开始; 我们为什么这样写，以及这样做可能会失去什么。这意味着探索学术写作的历史，以及讨论复杂的，但令人兴奋的，写作，身份，语言之间的关系，以及进行研究的过程。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09534-2

《Strategic Bureaucracy: The Convergence of Bureaucratic and Strategic Management Logics in the Organizational Restructuring of Universities》

《战略科层制: 高校组织结构调整中科层制与战略管理逻辑的融合》

作者：Peter Woelert · Bjørn Stensaker

英文摘要：  Over recent decades, one can identify two key narratives associated with changes in university organization and governance. The first narrative focuses on the administrative consequences of an off-loading state relinquishing direct control over some of universities’ internal operations while at the same time driving bureaucratization at the institutional level. The second narrative focuses on the emergence of an increasingly competitive and uncertain environment driving universities to transform into strategically managed organizations. In this paper, we argue that while the organizational logics associated with these two narratives imply differently accentuated forms of legitimation, they converge and combine with respect to key dimensions of universities’ internal organizing, ultimately giving rise to a hybrid form of organizational governance we label ‘strategic bureaucracy’. Such strategic bureaucracy, we illustrate, is characterized by a strong focus on strategic leadership and the associated management techniques while also intensifying organizational features traditionally associated with bureaucratic governance such as formalization and hierarchical authority.

中文摘要： 近几十年来，人们可以确定与大学组织和治理变化有关的两个关键叙述。第一个叙述集中在一个卸载国家放弃对一些大学内部运作的直接控制，同时在机构层面推动官僚化的行政后果。第二个叙述侧重于竞争日益激烈和不确定的环境的出现，这种环境驱使大学转变为战略管理组织。在本文中，我们认为，虽然与这两种叙事相关的组织逻辑暗示不同的强调形式的合法性，他们收敛和结合方面的关键维度的大学的内部组织，最终产生了一个混合形式的组织治理，我们称之为“战略官僚主义”。我们举例说明，这种战略官僚拥有属性强调战略领导和相关的管理技巧，同时也强化了传统上与官僚治理相关的组织特征，如正规化和等级权威。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09535-1

《Benchmarking and the Technicization of Academic Discourse: The Case of the EU at-Risk of Poverty or Social Exclusion Composite Indicator》

《标杆管理与学术话语的技术化: 欧盟贫困风险或社会排斥综合指标的案例》

作者：Marianna Zieleńska · Magdalena Wnuk

英文摘要：  Drawing on the critical discourse analysis of journals and working papers from 2011-2020 referring to the at-risk of poverty or social exclusion composite indicator (AROPE), we shed light on how benchmarks technicize academic discourse, particularly in its part contributed by economists. First developed to measure progress towards the poverty target set in the EU's Europe 2020 strategy, AROPE has easily permeated academic debate. Its anchoring in statistical procedures and expertise has allowed it to function in this debate as a neutral and purely technical measurement tool, obscuring the interests and normative choices underlying its design and implementation. As a result, the discursive practices associated with the benchmark have led to the reproduction and legitimization of the anti-poverty policy objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy. Simultaneously, AROPE has provided a 'cognitive infrastructure' that enabled an economic view of the world geared towards raising competitiveness. It has made it possible to assess which Member State is doing well and which is doing poorly, and making recommendations on how the laggards should improve. Our analysis shows that benchmarks such as AROPE support the process of shaping Europe as a supranational entity, creating a picture of common European problems with uniform definitions, on the basis of which it is possible to divide Member States into better and worse performers and even promote common solutions through good practices. We conclude by highlighting that the academic discourse around AROPE, generated mainly by economists, reflects the growing interdependence of the academic and political spheres and the pressure for research to have social and political impact.

中文摘要： 借鉴2011-2020年期刊和工作论文的批评性话语分析，这些期刊和工作论文提到了贫困风险或社会排斥综合指标(AROPE) ，我们阐明了基准是如何将学术话语技术化的，尤其是经济学家贡献的部分。AROPE 最初是为了衡量欧盟2020年欧洲战略中设定的贫困目标的进展情况而开发的，它很容易就渗透到学术辩论中。它以统计程序和专门知识为基础，使它能够在这场辩论中作为一个中立和纯技术性的衡量工具发挥作用，模糊了其设计和执行所依据的利益和规范选择。因此，与基准相关的散漫做法导致了欧洲2020年战略除贫政策目标的复制和合法化。与此同时，AROPE 提供了一个“认知基础设施”，使世界经济的观点面向提高竞争力。它使我们能够评估哪个会员国做得好，哪个会员国做得不好，并就如何改进落后国家提出建议。我们的分析表明，AROPE 等基准支持将欧洲塑造成一个超国家实体的进程，以统一的定义勾勒出欧洲共同问题的图景，在此基础上，可以将会员国分为业绩较好和较差的国家，甚至可以通过良好做法促进共同解决办法。最后，我们强调，围绕 AROPE 的学术讨论(主要由经济学家发起)反映出学术和政治领域日益相互依赖，以及研究产生社会和政治影响的压力。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09537-z

《Between Delivery and Luck: Projectification of Academic Careers and Conflicting Notions of Worth at the Postdoc Level》

《在交付与运气之间: 博士后学术生涯的预测与价值观的冲突》

作者：Jonatan Nästesjö

英文摘要：  This paper investigates how early career academics interpret and respond to institutional demands structured by projectification. Developing a ‘frame analytic’ approach, it explores projectification as a process constituted at the level of meaning-making. Building on 35 in-depth interviews with fixed-term scholars in political science and history, the findings show that respondents jointly referred to competition and delivery in order to make sense of their current situation. Forming what I call the project frame, these interpretive orientations were legitimized by various organizational routines within the studied departments, feeding into a dominant regime of valuation and accumulation. However, while the content of the project frame is well-defined, attempts to align with it vary, indicating the importance of disciplines and academic age when navigating project-based careers. Furthermore, this way of framing academic work and careers provokes tensions and conflicts that junior scholars try to manage. To curb their competitive relationship and enable cooperation, respondents emphasized the outcome of project funding as ‘being lucky.’ They also drew on imagined futures to envision alternative scripts of success and worth. Both empirically and conceptually, the article contributes to an understanding of academic career-making as a kind of pragmatic problem-solving, centered on navigating multiple career pressures and individual aspirations.

中文摘要： 本文探讨了早期职业学者如何解释和应对由预测构成的制度需求。发展一个“框架分析”的方法，它探索投射作为一个过程构成的意义制定的水平。根据对政治科学和历史领域定期学者进行的35次深入访谈，调查结果显示，受访者共同提到竞争和交付，以便了解自己的现状。形成我所说的项目框架，这些解释的方向是合法的各种组织程序在研究的部门，输入一个主导的制度的价值和积累。然而，尽管项目框架的内容定义良好，但试图与其保持一致的做法各不相同，这表明了在导航基于项目的职业生涯时，学科和学术年龄的重要性。此外，这种框架学术工作和职业生涯的方式引起紧张和冲突，初级学者试图管理。为了抑制他们之间的竞争关系，促进合作，受访者强调项目资助的结果是“幸运的”。他们还利用想象中的未来来设想成功和价值的替代脚本。本文从实证和概念两个方面，将学术生涯规划理解为一种实用主义的解决问题的方法，以解决多重职业压力和个人愿望为中心。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09541-3

《Cultural Shifts in High Energy Physics Collaboration from the Cold War to the Present: A Historical and Philosophical Perspective》

《从冷战到现在高能物理合作中的文化转变: 历史和哲学的视角》

作者：Polina S. Petruhina · Vitaly Pronskikh

英文摘要：  This article employs empirical history and the philosophy of science to study cultural convergences and divergences in international collaborations in high energy physics. We examine two cases: (1) E-36, an experiment on small angle proton-proton scattering conducted during the Cold War at the National Accelerator Laboratory (NAL) in the USA by Soviet and US scientists and (2) an ongoing collaborative experiment, NICA, at the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR, Dubna), which is a project devoted to heavy-ion physics. The JINR, particularly its Laboratory of High Energy Physics (formerly the “Laboratory of High Energies”) is the main mediating actor between these two cases (i.e., E-36 and NICA), as the majority of Soviet participants in E-36 were representatives of the Institute. Using empirical data collected through archival searches, field observations conducted at JINR in 2018–2019, and in-depth interviews, we tell a story of cultural differences in high energy physics by applying the concepts of ‘trading zones’ (P. Galison) and the translation of interests in actor-networks (B. Latour, M. Callon and others). We analyze three types of cultural diversity (specialization, nationality, and generational) in light of the implications of temporal context and the dichotomy between East and West, showing the roles cultural diversity plays in scientific collaboration (which is an integral part of as well as obstacle to scientific research that can nevertheless provide learning opportunities). Our study aims to demonstrate how disunity and diversity may function in scientific research and how high energy physics collaborations can remain productive despite sometimes deep divergences, including those between East and West.

中文摘要： 本文运用经验历史和科学哲学研究高能物理国际合作中的文化趋同和文化差异。我们研究了两个案例: (1) E-36，冷战期间由苏联和美国科学家在美国国家加速器实验室(nAL)进行的小角度质子-质子散射实验; (2)一个正在进行的合作实验，在核研究联合研究所(jINR，杜布纳河) ，这是一个致力于重离子物理的项目。JINR，特别是其高能物理实验室(前身是“高能物理实验室”)是这两个案例(即 E-36和 NICA)之间的主要调解人，因为 E-36的大多数苏联参与者是该研究所的代表。利用通过档案搜索收集的实证数据，2018-2019年在 JINR 进行的实地观察以及深度访谈，我们通过应用“交易区”(P. Galison)的概念和演员网络兴趣的转换(B. Latour，M. Callon 等人)来讲述高能物理中的文化差异。我们分析了三种类型的文化多样性(专业化，民族和世代) ，根据时间背景的含义和东西方之间的二分法，显示了文化多样性在科学合作中的作用(这是科学研究的一个组成部分，也是科学研究的障碍，但仍然可以提供学习机会)。我们的研究旨在证明不统一和多样性如何在科学研究中发挥作用，以及高能物理学合作如何能够保持生产力，尽管有时存在很大的分歧，包括东西方之间的分歧。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09543-1

《Enhancing China’s Incentive System for Scientific Innovation: A Review and Recommendations》

《完善中国科技创新激励机制的思考与建议》

作者：Yuchen Qian · Liyin Zhang · Xin Liu · Jiang Li

英文摘要：  This academic paper critically examines the incentive measures established by China to foster scientific innovation. The study explores China’s five key incentive measures, namely the pilot tenure-track system, monetary rewards for scientific publications, research awards for scientific achievements, "hat-talent" selection, and research funding system. The analysis also addresses the challenges associated with these measures, such as heightened work stress due to intense competition and occurrences of academic misconduct. In conclusion, two recommendations are proposed to enhance China’s incentive system: the establishment of a responsible peer review system and the reduction of administrative power’s influence on scientists’ career trajectories.

中文摘要： 本文对中国为促进科技创新而制定的激励措施进行了批判性研究。本研究探讨了中国的五项关键激励措施，即试点终身制、科学出版物经济奖励、科研成果奖励、“帽子人才”选拔和研究资助制度。分析还涉及与这些措施有关的挑战，例如由于激烈的竞争和学术不端行为的发生而加剧的工作压力。最后，提出了完善中国科学家激励机制的两点建议: 建立负责任的同行评议制度和减少行政权力对科学家职业发展轨迹的影响。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09554-y

《Territorial Inequalities and (de)Concentration of Public Investment in Science: A Study on CONICET (Argentina) and the Tensions Between Academic Excellence and Equity》

《地域不平等与公共科学投资的(去)集中——阿根廷 CONICET 与学术成就与公平的紧张关系研究》

作者：Andrés Niembro · Fernando Svampa

英文摘要：  The search for equity in science policy (in terms of territory, gender and other inequalities of opportunity) faces strong tensions with academic excellence, autonomy and meritocracy, which ultimately tend to concentration. Integrating different but related approaches and concepts, this article proposes an analytical framework to study the evolution of scientific policies, instruments or organizations through the lens of these tensions. The utility of this framework is illustrated by a case study of the Argentine National Scientific and Technical Research Council (CONICET in Spanish) and its scientific researcher career, with a focus on the deconcentration initiatives during the 2010-2022 period. This comprehensive perspective shows how tensions and contradictions translate into frequent marches and countermarches, turning the career calls into an incoherent set of layers, rationales, objectives and impacts, which counteract each other and tend to perpetuate rather than diminish territorial inequalities. Beyond this particular case study, we hope that this approach can be adapted in future research to examine other science policies and institutions, in order to identify and highlight the internal tensions that could interfere with some of the intended (equity) objectives.

中文摘要： 在科学政策中寻求公平(就领土、性别和其他机会不平等而言)面临着与学术优秀、自主和任人唯贤的强烈紧张关系，这些最终倾向于集中。综合不同但相关的方法和概念，本文提出了一个分析框架，通过这些紧张关系的透镜来研究科学政策、工具或组织的演变。阿根廷国家科学技术研究委员会(CONICET，西班牙语)及其科学研究人员职业生涯的案例研究说明了该框架的实用性，重点是2010-2022年期间的分散举措。这种全面的视角显示了紧张和矛盾是如何转化为频繁的游行和反游行的，将职业呼唤变成了一系列不连贯的层次、理由、目标和影响，它们相互抵消，往往会延续而不是减少领土不平等。除了这个特殊的案例研究，我们希望这种方法可以在未来的研究中适用于检查其他科学政策和机构，以确定和强调可能干扰一些预期(公平)目标的内部紧张关系。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09550-2

《Becoming an Impact-Driven University: A Socio-Technical Analysis of the Reconfiguration of Relevance During Institutional Transformation》

《成为影响驱动型大学: 制度变迁中关联重构的社会技术分析》

作者：Jorrit Smit · Lisa Burghardt · Lucy van Eck

英文摘要：  The age-old debate about the relation between science and society has, in the last two decades, materialized in novel forms at many universities. In this article, we follow the reconfiguration of relevance at one institute of higher education that aspires to become an impact-driven university. We employ a socio-technical instrumentation perspective to this institutional transformation so that we can follow how relevance is being enacted in terms of impact at different organizational levels. To grasp the links between organizational changes and the conditions for academic practices, we analyze three policy instruments in-the-making and in-use: impact narratives as novel evaluation tool, the creation of impact profiles as part of human resource policy and new data infrastructures to monitor impact on the sustainable development goals. We investigate their problematizations and imaginaries through qualitative methods, namely document analysis and semi-structured interviews with researchers at various career levels and faculties at Erasmus University Rotterdam. Through the cases, we analyze how these new impact-oriented instruments open up or close down opportunities for academic practices. Our observations show that the reconfiguration of relevance as impact implies the advancement of a strategic approach to relevance and to academic work and institutions more generally. Ultimately, the site-specific case also includes bottom-up problematizations of impact that lead us to reflect on the limitations of a policy instrument approach and stress the importance of addressing the politics of the social relations of ‘relevant’ scientific work.

中文摘要： 在过去的二十年里，关于科学与社会之间关系的古老争论在许多大学以新颖的形式出现。在本文中，我们遵循在一所高等教育机构的相关性重新配置，立志成为一个影响力驱动的大学。我们从社会技术工具的角度来看待这一体制转型，以便我们能够了解相关性在不同组织层面产生的影响。为了把握组织变革与学术实践条件之间的联系，我们分析了正在制定和使用的三种政策工具: 作为新的评价工具的影响说明; 作为人力资源政策的一部分创建影响简介; 以及监测对可持续发展目标影响的新数据基础设施。我们通过定性的方法，即文件分析和半结构化访谈来调查他们的问题和想象，访谈对象是不同职业水平的研究人员和鹿特丹大学。通过案例，我们分析了这些以影响为导向的新工具如何为学术实践开辟或关闭机会。我们的意见表明，将相关性重新定位为影响意味着推进对相关性以及对学术工作和机构的战略方针。最终，特定地点的案例还包括自下而上的影响问题，这导致我们反思政策工具方法的局限性，并强调解决“相关”科学工作的社会关系的政治的重要性。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09557-9

《Science and Innovation: A Cyclical Approach》

《科学与创新: 一种周期性方法》

作者：Jo�ão Ricardo Faria · Christopher Boudreaux · Rajeev K. Goel · Devrim Göktepe‐Hultén

英文摘要：  To formally understand cyclicity in innovation and to tie to Schumpeter’s idea about waves of creative destruction, we elaborate upon Thomas Kuhn’s (1962) hypothesis that science evolves through a succession of paradigm life cycles by noting that entrepreneurs recognize the profitability of new scientific theories through a delay. The delay from innovation to entrepreneurship may be due to technological inertia, the time taken in recognizing the applications of basic research, or related to how quickly technological change evolves over time and its returns are realized. In our model, a profit-maximizing entrepreneur uses the latest scientific knowledge to create innovative technologies, which generates cycles between science and innovation. The necessary conditions for the existence of cycles are that human capital employed in science creation and high valued innovations is high, and the interest rate is low. The findings also tie to the notion about the variability of innovation over the business cycle and can provide useful inputs into the formulation of more effective technology policies.

中文摘要： 为了正式理解创新的周期性，并与熊彼特关于创造性破坏浪潮的观点联系起来，我们详细阐述了托马斯 · 库恩(Thomas Kuhn，1962)的假设，即科学通过一系列范式生命周期进化，注意到企业家通过延迟认识到新科学理论的盈利性。从创新到创业的延迟可能是由于技术惯性、认识基础研究应用所需的时间，或者与技术变革随着时间的推移及其回报的实现速度有关。在我们的模型中，追求利润最大化的企业家利用最新的科学知识创造创新技术，从而在科学和创新之间产生循环。循环存在的必要条件是科技创新和高价值创新所使用的人力资本高，利率低。研究结果还与创新在商业周期中的可变性概念有关，可为制定更有效的技术政策提供有益的投入。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09531-5

《Readjustment of Returning Scholars: Experiences of Cambodian Researchers》

《回国学者的调适: 柬埔寨研究者的经验》

作者：Aliya Kuzhabekova · Кайрат Молдашев · Altyn Baigazina · Vichny Chanchem

英文摘要：  Many developing countries prioritize sponsoring graduate students to study abroad to bring expertise and knowledge to their home country. However, the success of knowledge transfer depends on the extent to which returning graduates can utilize their potential at home. This study explores challenges faced by Cambodian scholars who obtained their Ph.D. degrees abroad and describes strategies they used to overcome them. In a home country environment with limited funding, over-bureaucratization, and low priority of university research, graduates see the value of their foreign Ph.D. degrees in teaching and consultation. It requires motivation and significant efforts to transition as researchers in such an environment. Returning scholars rely on networks with their peers abroad and supervisors, form local research societies, engage with graduate students at their universities to keep themselves active as researchers.

中文摘要： 许多发展中国家优先考虑资助研究生出国留学，以便将专门知识和知识带回本国。然而，知识转移的成功与否取决于回国大学毕业生能在多大程度上发挥他们在国内的潜力。本研究探讨了在国外获得博士学位的柬埔寨学者所面临的挑战，并描述了他们用来克服这些挑战的策略。在资金有限、官僚化程度过高、大学研究优先度低的母国环境中，毕业生们看到了他们的外国博士学位在教学和咨询方面的价值。在这样的环境中，作为研究者的转变需要动力和巨大的努力。回国的学者依靠与国外同行和主管的关系网，组建当地的研究协会，与大学的研究生接触，以保持自己作为研究人员的积极性。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09522-6

《The Therapeutic University》

《治疗大学》

作者：Joseph C. Hermanowicz

英文摘要：  Universities are generally understood as organizations that extend knowledge based on codified bodies of work developed from systematic research and scholarship. This article examines the emergence of an organizational form that increasingly competes in contemporary higher education: the therapeutic university. A recent phenomenon, the therapeutic university is predicated on emotion in which the goal is to make the experience as a student as comfortable as possible. The article discusses organizational morphology of the therapeutic university by identifying practices within it. The practices establish a contest between a rational-universalistic orientation of the university on the one hand and an emotion-particularistic orientation on the other. The article provides an explanation for why this organizational form arose and what it purports to accomplish. Its operations are ensnared by major paradox: as its identity implies, the therapeutic university postures to do good, but its practices, it is argued, debilitate students and higher learning. The mandate that the broader society gives to higher education is thereby susceptible to lost confidence. The article concludes by discussing a way in which universities may be inoculated from the conditions that support their present-day therapeutic proclivities.

中文摘要： 大学通常被理解为在系统研究和学术成果的基础上扩展知识的组织。本文考察了在当代高等教育中竞争日益激烈的一种组织形式: 治疗性大学的出现。最近的一个现象是，治疗性大学以情感为基础，其目标是使学生的经历尽可能舒适。本文通过对治疗性大学组织形态的实证分析，探讨了治疗性大学的组织形态。这些实践在大学的理性-普遍性取向与情感-特殊性取向之间建立了一种较量。本文解释了这种组织形式产生的原因及其意图实现的目的。它的运作陷入了主要的悖论: 正如它的身份所暗示的，治疗性大学的姿态是做好事，但它的实践，它被认为，削弱了学生和高等教育。因此，更广泛的社会赋予高等教育的使命很容易丧失信心。文章最后讨论了一种方法，大学可以接种的条件，支持他们目前的治疗倾向。

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-024-09539-x