https://ukr-socium.org.ua/archives/no-1-84-2023/

Author:

Hnatiuk V. V.ORCID,

Abstract

The article focuses on the issue of highlighting the approaches being tested in contemporary migration studies to demonstrate their limits – conceptual, methodological, and methodical – as analytical tools. The three most popular research perspectives, namely positivism, relativism, and critical realism, are taken as a basis. The author substantiates the idea that the approach accumulates a much broader context than just the instrumental one, which correlates to the realization of an exclusively methodical function. Since by choosing one of the forms of analytics, scholars outline the ontological and epistemological framework of the methodology in the study of migration. Based on the key provisions (principles) of each approach, the author characterizes them as general scientific and specialized tools (for migration scholars) and identifies the different by nature shortcomings and opportunities for applying the obtained results. A particular focus is on demonstrating examples of research works that test these approaches. It is argued that positivism and relativism are monofactorial, less critical and more superficial (flatness) approaches compared to critical realism, characterized by stratified ontological realism, methodological pluralism, and judgment rationality. It is shown that the reasons for the popularity of positivist and relativist types of thinking are the methodological possibility of simplifying political issues and applying knowledge about migration to legitimize certain political beliefs and actions, on the one hand, and their deep internal hierarchization, which provides flexibility and opportunities for improvement, on the other. Finally, the author emphasizes the prospects for further research focusing on the scientific (revision of positivism and relativism under the necessities of the present), philosophical (rethinking the epistemological and practical components of the approach, balancing them) and practical (the need for higher representativeness of research conducted within the framework of critical realism) dimensions of migration issues.

Publisher

National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (Co. LTD Ukrinformnauka) (Publications)

Reference54 articles.

1. Epistemological issues in qualitative migration research: self-reflexivity, objectivity and subjectivity;Iosifides;In R Zapata-Barrero E Yalaz (Eds ) Qualitative Research in European Migration Studies (pp,2018

2. 2. Mills, C. (2000). The sociological imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

3. National and subnational comparative politics: why, what and how;Tillin;Studies in Indian Politics 1 (2),2013

4. Routledge handbook of migration and development;Bastia;Taylor and Francis,2020

5. 5. Dauvergne, C. (Ed.). (2021). Research handbook on the law and politics of migration. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

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