K. Moloney, Meng-Hsuan Chou, Philip D. Osei, Yonique Campbell
{"title":"方法论美国主义:(美国)公共管理中的学科衰老与知识霸权","authors":"K. Moloney, Meng-Hsuan Chou, Philip D. Osei, Yonique Campbell","doi":"10.1080/10841806.2022.2140387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this introduction, we introduce the concept of methodological Americanism to describe and explain the epistemological problem plaguing the public administration discipline. We argue that the discipline, dominated by US-focused analyses, is methodologically nationalist and White and represents a hegemonic intellectualism that limits what is “knowable.” To ensure continual disciplinary relevance of public administration studies, we propose that epistemological diversity—achievable by reshaping the disciplinary table—is the way forward. We conclude by summarizing how the articles in this first of two Special Issues contribute to paving the way toward epistemological diversity.","PeriodicalId":37205,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Theory and Praxis","volume":"44 1","pages":"261 - 276"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methodological Americanism: Disciplinary senility and intellectual hegemonies in (American) public administration\",\"authors\":\"K. Moloney, Meng-Hsuan Chou, Philip D. Osei, Yonique Campbell\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10841806.2022.2140387\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In this introduction, we introduce the concept of methodological Americanism to describe and explain the epistemological problem plaguing the public administration discipline. We argue that the discipline, dominated by US-focused analyses, is methodologically nationalist and White and represents a hegemonic intellectualism that limits what is “knowable.” To ensure continual disciplinary relevance of public administration studies, we propose that epistemological diversity—achievable by reshaping the disciplinary table—is the way forward. We conclude by summarizing how the articles in this first of two Special Issues contribute to paving the way toward epistemological diversity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37205,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Administrative Theory and Praxis\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"261 - 276\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Administrative Theory and Praxis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2022.2140387\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administrative Theory and Praxis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2022.2140387","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Methodological Americanism: Disciplinary senility and intellectual hegemonies in (American) public administration
Abstract In this introduction, we introduce the concept of methodological Americanism to describe and explain the epistemological problem plaguing the public administration discipline. We argue that the discipline, dominated by US-focused analyses, is methodologically nationalist and White and represents a hegemonic intellectualism that limits what is “knowable.” To ensure continual disciplinary relevance of public administration studies, we propose that epistemological diversity—achievable by reshaping the disciplinary table—is the way forward. We conclude by summarizing how the articles in this first of two Special Issues contribute to paving the way toward epistemological diversity.