Driven by Academic Norms and Status of Employment: The Advisory Roles of Political Scientists in Germany

Author:

Blum Sonja,Jungblut Jens

Abstract

AbstractThe consensus-seeking nature of Germany’s civic epistemology and largely absent structural incentives for advisory work of academics may imply an overall comparatively lower engagement. Yet, German political science stands in the tradition of a ‘watchdog’ of democracy, and the past decades bear witness of continued involvement in societal and political debates. Not least, German political scientists have led a vivid internal debate on the ‘relevance of our discipline’ in recent years, reflected in a number of conferences and publications. Germany thus makes an interesting case regarding the advisory role of political scientists in a comparative perspective. This chapter studies how, to whom, and how often political scientists in Germany provide their expertise for policymaking. It is based on the German results of the ProSEPS survey, accompanied by a case illustration of advice and opinionating on the rise of populism. The analysis shows not only that German political scientists are less active in comparison to colleagues in many other countries but also that they are more active than could be expected—with academic norms and employment situation forming key explanatory factors for the level and forms of engagement.

Funder

COST Network

University of Siena

Publisher

Springer International Publishing

Reference22 articles.

1. Blum, S., & Jungblut, J. (2020). Besondere Freiheit, besondere Verantwortung? Eine empirische Studie zur deutschen Politikwissenschaft in der Politikberatung. dms – der moderne staat – Zeitschrift für Public Policy, Recht und Management, 13(2), 486–506.

2. Blum, S., & Schubert, K. (Eds.). (2013a). Policy analysis in Germany. The Policy Press.

3. Blum, S., & Schubert, K. (2013b). Policy analysis in Germany: Past, present, and future of the discipline. In S. Blum & K. Schubert (Eds.), Policy analysis in Germany (pp. 1–17). The Policy Press.

4. Craft, J., & Howlett, M. (2013). The dual dynamics of policy advisory systems: The impact of externalization and politicization on policy advice. Policy and Society, 32, 187–197.

5. Debus, M., Faas, T., & Schäfer, A. (2017). Einfluss auf Debatten. Ist die Politikwissenschaft irrelevant? FAZ, May 17. https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/einfluss-auf-debatten-ist-die-politikwissenschaft-irrelevant-15019746.html

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3