17 European Journal of Politics and Gender • vol 1 • no 1–2 • 17–36 © European Conference on Politics and Gender and Bristol University Press 2018 Print ISSN 2515 1088 • Online ISSN 2515 1096 https://doi.org/10.1332/251510818X15272520831166 RESEARCH Intersectionality and the politics of knowledge production Liza Mügge, L.M.Mugge@uva.nl University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands Celeste Montoya, montoyc@colorado.edu University of Colorado Boulder, USA Akwugo Emejulu, A.Emejulu@warwick.ac.uk University of Warwick, UK S. Laurel Weldon, weldons
illustrates how the ERC requires authorisation through governing by knowledge production whereby what is known, how it is known, what is worth knowing, and who the knowers are is integral to how structures operate in regard to strategic and tactical public policy design and enactment. Policy is infused with eugenicist populism where the ERC is replete with justifications of exceptionality: Somehow the idea of the 1 per cent of the population being particularly clever has become mixed up with the idea of there always being 1 per cent at the top. It is in the interests of
67 4 Regulating for ‘care-ful’ knowledge production: researching older people, isolation and loneliness Helen Manchester, Jenny Barke and the Productive Margins Collective Introduction Collaborative, co-produced research is positioned as increasingly essential to the university in delivering public good and in finding answers to the increasingly ‘wicked’ problems that we face as social researchers (Facer and Enright, 2016). Important questions need to be asked concerning how far current regulatory norms and practices around research maximise insights and
PART I Theorizing China’s Rise: Beyond Eurocentric Knowledge Production
93 7 ‘I’ve never told anybody that before’: the virtual archive and collaborative spaces of knowledge production Tom Jackson The creation of ‘virtual archives’ of community spaces has the potential to engage community members who inhabit (or, through some other form of lived experience, identify with) those spaces as active participants in the collaborative construction of knowledge regarding their cultural, historical and social significance. In the representation of community spaces using ‘immersive’ and ‘embodied’ technologies and the open
397 Evidence & Policy • vol 13 • no 3 • 397–400 • © Policy Press 2017 • #EVPOL Print ISSN 1744 2648 • Online ISSN 1744 2656 • https://doi.org/10.1332/174426417X15008911642971 editorial Politics and practices of knowledge production and use David Gough, david.gough@ucl.ac.uk University College London, UK Annette Boaz, a.boaz@sgul.kingston.ac.uk Kingston University and St George’s, University of London, UK To cite this article: Gough, D, Boaz, A (2017) Politics and practices of knowledge production and use, Evidence & Policy, vol 13 no 3, 397–400, DOI: 10
Growing interest in the potential of collaborative approaches to knowledge production as innovative solutions to bridging the research-to-practice gap ( Boaz et al, 2018 ; Rycroft Malone et al, 2016 ) has been accompanied by critical considerations, both in this journal (for example Geddes et al, 2018 and Décieux, 2018 ) and wider public management literatures ( Osborne et al, 2016 ; Osborne, 2018 ). Several recent reviews and commentaries (for example, Beresford, 2019 ; Paylor and McKevitt, 2019 ; Greenhalgh et al, 2016 ) and a special issue ( Bovaird
’s sustainable development research is limited to the processes that occur within the city boundaries and not beyond (see Wachsmuth et al, 2016 ). Conclusion This chapter discussed the vicious relationship between academic research seeking for easy success in times of neo-neoliberal knowledge production and planners seeking for positive justifications of best-practices. The picture we sketched goes beyond the individual responsibilities of the researchers. It is instead a symptom of a pervasive logic of neoliberal governance that transversally hits several sectors of
Creating common foundations for knowledge production on and in Asia Transforming the mode of knowledge production in the early 21st-century world The world is changing. It requires people in various places in the world to redefine themselves and the world at the same time. To speak boldly, the difficulty Asian people have in defining themselves comes from the existence of a global form of knowledge production centred on North America and Europe. Most of the important academic discourse is still mainly produced in these regions. Researchers from Asia usually
Western politicians consider that leadership is essential for the delivery of educational reform. This important and timely book examines how leaders, leading and leadership became the dominant theme in education. It presents an analysis of the relationship between the state, public policy and the types of knowledge that New Labour used to make policy and break professional cultures. It is essential reading for all those interested in public policy, education policy, and debates about governance and will be of interest to policymakers, researchers and educational professionals.
