The Potential for Political Scientists to Remain Relevant: A Comment on Flinders

Author:

Brans Marleen1ORCID,Timmermans Arco2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. KU Leuven

2. Leiden University

Abstract

AbstractBrans and Timmermans respond to Flinders' concerns about the potential irrelevance of political science due to the pressures of impact regimes. Based on a 2018 survey of 12,400 European political scientists, they show that 80% of political scientists actively engage in policy advising. They identify four advisory roles: Pure Academic, Expert, Opinionating Scholar, and Public Intellectual, with most political scientists fitting the Opinionating Scholar type. Contrary to Flinders' fears of depoliticization, most political scientists make normative statements and engage on intrinsically political topics. Rather than being confined to a dyadic relationship with policymakers, their engagements are diverse, targeting civil society actors, government agencies, and think tanks. They are moreover driven by professional duty rather than extrinsic incentives. Based on the study's results the contribution refutes the notion that increased policy engagement leads to irrelevance: political scientists have the potential to maintain criticality and influence in policy advisory systems across Europe.

Funder

European Cooperation in Science and Technology

Publisher

Wiley

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