方法论美国主义:(美国)公共管理中的学科衰老与知识霸权

Q1 Social Sciences
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}
引用次数: 4

摘要

摘要在引言中,我们引入了方法论美国主义的概念来描述和解释困扰公共行政学科的认识论问题。我们认为,这门由以美国为中心的分析主导的学科在方法论上是民族主义的,是白人的,代表着一种霸权智主义,它限制了“可知的”。为了确保公共管理研究的持续学科相关性,我们提出,通过重塑学科表来实现的认识论多样性是前进的方向。最后,我们总结了两期特刊中第一期的文章如何为认识论的多样性铺平道路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Administrative Theory and Praxis
Administrative Theory and Praxis Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信