T May

Qualitative research in action

Introduction Transformation in Principles and Practice PART ONE: PUTTING THE PRACTICE INTO THEORY Institutional Ethnography - Dorothy E Smith Critical Realist Ethnography - Sam Porter Framing the Rational in Fieldwork - Peter K Manning Analysing Interaction - Christian Heath and Jon Hindmarsh Video, Ethnography and Situated Conduct PART TWO: GENERALIZATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS Generalization in Interpretive Research - Malcolm Williams Representation, Responsibilty and Reliability in Participant-Observation - Mart[ac]in S[ac]anchez-Jankowski Automating the Ineffable - Nigel G Fielding Qualitative Software and the Meaning of Qualitative Research Subjectivity and Qualitative Method - Valeria Walkerdine, Helen Lucey and June Melody PART THREE: CHOICES IN CONTEXT Observation and Interviewing - Kathleen Gerson and Ruth Horowitz Options and Choices in Qualitative Research Qualitative Interviewing - Jennifer Mason Asking, Listening and Interpreting Narrative in Social Research - Steph Lawler PART FOUR: POWER, PARTICIPATION AND EXPERTISE Engagement and Evaluation in Qualitative Inquiry - Linda McKie Negotiating Power and Expertise in the Field - Lynne Haney On Relations between Black Female Researcher and Participants - Tracey Reynolds PART FIVE: REFLEXIVITY, THE SELF AND POSITIONING Ethnography and the Self - Amanda Coffey Reflections and Representations Reflexivity and the Politics of Qualitative Research - Lisa Adkins Techniques for Telling the Reflexive Self - Beverley Skeggs Emotions, Fieldwork and Professional Lives - Sherryl Kleinman

Introduction to the philosophy of social research

What is science? philosophy, social science and method knowing the social world objectivity and values in social research philosophical issues in the process of social research post-structuralism, postmodernism and social research.

Governance, Science Policy and Regions: An Introduction

When the first Regional Science and Industry Council was launched in the North West of England in 2001, press releases proclaimed that ‘science history’ was being made (NWDA, 2001). Awave of institutional creation and policy innovation followed across the English regions, accompanied by the hope that investments in the science base would deliver long-awaited improvements in regional economic performance and thus reduce gaps in prosperity across the country (PERRY, 2007; CHARLES and BENNEWORTH, 2001). Developments in the English regions in the early 2000s have mirrored processes elsewhere in Europe and internationally, where science policy governance is being re-scaled and re-shaped in response to the ‘new’ dynamics of the knowledge economy and the neo-liberal imperative to compete for and concentrate increasingly scarce public resources. This special issue subjects these processes to muchneeded critical analysis. Such is the urgency with which the ‘survival of the fittest’ mentality has been adopted at European, national and regional levels that policy is proceeding without adequate reflection or theoretical analysis. All too often science is seen as ‘economic saviour’, in an attempt to emulate wellknown exemplars and in pursuit of the ‘high-tech fantasy’ (MASSEY et al., 1992). Little consideration has been given to constraining and enabling factors on the effective formulation and implementation of policy in terms of governance structures, policy processes or organizational capacity. It is here that the special issue finds its place. It brings together contributions from England, France, Finland, Japan, Germany and Canada to examine how the governance of science policy is changing, what different regional approaches to building science regions can be seen and the extent to which there are positive effects of these changes on policy outcomes relating to regional economic development, distribution and concentration of resource (SHARP, 1998; HERAUD, 2003; CHARLES, 2006). The dynamic relationship between science, governance and economy is examined via interdisciplinary perspectives through which divergence and national difference, as well as convergence and homogeneity can be seen ( JASANOFF, 1997; SENKER et al., 1999; CROUCH and STREECK, 2002). In so doing, it informs the ongoing debate about forms of territorial re-scaling in relation to policy responsibilities (BRENNER, 2004) and the ways in which the dynamics of a globalizing, regionalizing ‘knowledge capitalism’ (DRUCKER, 1998) are filtered through different national–regional systems of governance. This special issue takes its inspiration from research funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Council’s (ESRC) Science in Society programme on ‘Building Science Regions in the European Research Area’ (RES-151-25-0037). The specific focus of this work was on processes of regionalization in science policy in Europe. However, we have sought to enlarge this perspective through engagement with a wider body of research from Asia and North America, funded by a variety of organizations at European, national and regional levels. The ESRC project sets the tone for the special issue in terms of the overarching rationale and common issues examined throughout the articles; furthermore, the themes chosen in this introduction reflect the main conclusions of that work. The aim is not only to further the theoretical debate on the dynamic interaction between science, governance and economy, but also to contribute to policy debates as a precursor to more meaningful and effective public policy processes.

From Banana Time to Just-in-Time: Power and Resistance at Work

Following debates within this journal regarding the absence of adequate studies of resistance in the contemporary fields of industrial sociology and organisational behaviour, this paper seeks to understand its reasons and consequences. Through an examination of the history of approaches to the study of power and resistance at work, the grounds for this debate are considered and illuminated. The paper then suggests how this debate might be taken forward through developing the ideas of tactics and strategies and episodic and dispositional power.

Urban knowledge exchange: devilish dichotomies and active intermediation

Knowledge exchange and innovation have a strong local dimension and require face-to-face relationships and collaborations between universities, industries and governments. Cities are turning to the knowledge base to enhance their own socio-economic development in the face of global competition and continuing gaps in prosperity. This paper examines the contexts, challenges and consequences of these shifts. First, the paper considers theoretical and policy rationales which create the conditions for the emergence of knowledge-based urban development (KBUD). Second, it highlights three dichotomies that produce tensions in the practice of knowledge exchange at an urban level. Finally, the paper considers the capacities and capabilities of different urban areas to respond to contemporary challenges through processes of active intermediation. In conclusion, this paper provides an agenda-setting provocation for the co-production of sustainable knowledge-based urban futures between academia, policy and practice.

Reflexivity in the age of reconstructive social science

Calls to reflexivity in social science have a long history. This article, after defining the terms endogenous and referential reflexivity, examines that history within several traditions. It argues that this history has tended to prioritize endogenous over referential reflexivity through an over-emphasis on the process of social research compared to what is learnt about social relations. As a result, interactions within the social world and the potential for transformations are not adequately understood, nor are the relations between the social sciences and social life.

Reflexivity and sociological practice

Attention to reflexivity is often assumed to be the means through which the assumptions and values of social scientists may be uncovered. Researchers are thus called upon to position themselves explicitly in terms of their place within the research process in order that their interpretations may be assessed according to situated aspects of their social selves. Taking a reconstructive social science as one whose aim is to examine our pre-theoretical knowledge in the spirit of producing more adequate accounts of the social world, this article seeks to make sense of these ideas in relation to their consequences for producing an engaged practice and body of knowledge.

Transformations in Academic Production: Content, Context and Consequence

Universities are subject to considerable changes as environmental pressures increasingly place their futures in question. As core sites of social scientific activity, it is important to understand not only why these changes are occurring, but their consequences for practices within universities. Without this and a concern with the future, their distinction and value as sites of activity are left to those whose instrumental practices are short-term and act according to apparent economic necessities. Frequently, explanations for this state of affairs focus upon the problems of increasing management and bureaucracy, but remain relatively silent concerning the activities of academics. This article argues that there is an affinity between forms of academic professionalism and the managerialism we find in universities as an answer to the changing pressures to which they are subject. Both exhibit an individualism and separate knowledge from knowing. Overall, this detracts from the cultures of universities and how these contexts relate to the content of the work that is produced within them.

A Future for Critique? Positioning, Belonging and Reflexivity

The principal aim of this article is to examine the relations between positioning and belonging in terms of the potential for critique of existing social conditions. The underlying purpose is to inform social scientific engagement with social life in order to illuminate the potential for social transformation via reflexivity. These discussions will be informed by the division of reflexivity into two dimensions: endogenous and referential. It is argued that this enables the social scientist to highlight the pre-reflexive world and render it problematic and demonstrates how the objectivity of the social world is both a presupposition and ongoing achievement of everyday interactions. To that extent, the possibility for social conditions to be otherwise is then open to scrutiny.

Cities, Knowledge and Universities: Transformations in the Image of the Intangible

The current higher educational landscape in the UK is marked by complex sets of expectations, accompanied by efforts to encourage universities into diversifying and stratifying functions. Yet the picture is far from clear and a number of tensions and contradictions remain, such as in relation to incentivisation and reward structures which impact differentially on universities. For universities that attempt to translate these agendas into meaningful actions at the local level, the result is a mixture of enthusiasm, engagement, retreat and defence. This article will demonstrate such processes in action through a discussion of the ongoing “Manchester––Knowledge Capital” initiative, which seeks to bring local and regional partners and universities together to create a critically acclaimed global pivot to the emerging knowledge economy.