Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Mode 2 and the Tension Between Excellence and Utility: The Case of a Policy Relevant Research Field in Sweden
Luleå University of Technology, Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Human Work Science.
Department of Business Administration, Lund University.
2016 (English)In: Minerva, ISSN 0026-4695, E-ISSN 1573-1871, Vol. 54, no 1, p. 1-20Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This paper investigates the impact of changing science policy doctrines on the development of an academic field, working life research. Working life research is an interdisciplinary field of study in which researchers and stakeholders collaborated to produce relevant knowledge. The development of the field, we argue, was both facilitated and justified by the, at the time dominant, science policy orthodoxy in Sweden, sector research. Sector research science policy doctrine favoured stakeholder-driven research agendas in the fields relevant to the sector. This approach to agenda setting was highly contested by Swedish universities and left scientists vulnerable to the fallout from any conflicts arising among the stakeholder groupings that were part of the governance arrangement. Our case shows that working life research was in part a victim of the struggle between science and policy over who sets the agenda for science in Sweden. In this struggle, each side chose to use ‘scientific quality’ as a proxy for furth ing its respective interests and visions for how science should be governed. The paper argues that this case is of interest to the continued elaboration of the Mode 2 thesis and the debate about ‘relevant science’. We find that the close association with stakeholders and the concomitant dependence it created left working life research unable to defend itself against its critics and that this state of affairs was particularly problematic for social science research on working life.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 54, no 1, p. 1-20
National Category
Production Engineering, Human Work Science and Ergonomics
Research subject
Industrial Work Environment
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-8020DOI: 10.1007/s11024-015-9288-zISI: 000372286100001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84961119866Local ID: 6762976d-cb2e-4204-8d60-28f46228dc4bOAI: oai:DiVA.org:ltu-8020DiVA, id: diva2:980910
Note
Validerad; 2016; Nivå 2; 20151211 (carhak)Available from: 2016-09-29 Created: 2016-09-29 Last updated: 2018-07-10Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Håkansta, Carin

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Håkansta, Carin
By organisation
Human Work Science
In the same journal
Minerva
Production Engineering, Human Work Science and Ergonomics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 180 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf