项目管理和研究治理——超越新自由主义的关键议程?——对雷夫斯蒂的评论

IF 1.3 Q2 GEOGRAPHY
Elisa Pascucci
{"title":"项目管理和研究治理——超越新自由主义的关键议程?——对雷夫斯蒂的评论","authors":"Elisa Pascucci","doi":"10.11143/fennia.126176","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this contribution to the debate that followed the publication of Hilde Refstie’s timely and cogent Reconfiguring research relevance, I propose to take a closer look at the funding structures that bind academia and other institutional and private sector actors into networks of collaboration and research co-production often experienced as dysfunctional. In particular, I focus on competitive funding bids that distribute financial and labour resources by awarding short-term ‘projects’, with particular reference to European Union (EU) projects. Drawing on my current research work on the ‘project economy’, co-led with Nadine Hassouneh and funded by the KONE Foundation at Tampere University, I make two initial suggestions that expand on some of the points raised so far in the discussion hosted by Fennia. First, project-based research funding is a more politicized and coercive tool than we tend to think. Second, project management and project-based work, and the associated patterns of (gendered and racialized) precarization and even abuse, have a longer and more ingrained history than what we commonly identify as the ‘neoliberalization’ of academia. By way of conclusion, I highlight how scrutinizing the funding architectures that enable and constrain our work help us to explore the relation between research and policy, beyond the limits of critical categories such as ‘neoliberalism’.","PeriodicalId":45082,"journal":{"name":"Fennia-International Journal of Geography","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Project management and research governance – towards a critical agenda beyond neoliberalization? – commentary to Refstie\",\"authors\":\"Elisa Pascucci\",\"doi\":\"10.11143/fennia.126176\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this contribution to the debate that followed the publication of Hilde Refstie’s timely and cogent Reconfiguring research relevance, I propose to take a closer look at the funding structures that bind academia and other institutional and private sector actors into networks of collaboration and research co-production often experienced as dysfunctional. In particular, I focus on competitive funding bids that distribute financial and labour resources by awarding short-term ‘projects’, with particular reference to European Union (EU) projects. Drawing on my current research work on the ‘project economy’, co-led with Nadine Hassouneh and funded by the KONE Foundation at Tampere University, I make two initial suggestions that expand on some of the points raised so far in the discussion hosted by Fennia. First, project-based research funding is a more politicized and coercive tool than we tend to think. Second, project management and project-based work, and the associated patterns of (gendered and racialized) precarization and even abuse, have a longer and more ingrained history than what we commonly identify as the ‘neoliberalization’ of academia. By way of conclusion, I highlight how scrutinizing the funding architectures that enable and constrain our work help us to explore the relation between research and policy, beyond the limits of critical categories such as ‘neoliberalism’.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45082,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fennia-International Journal of Geography\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fennia-International Journal of Geography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11143/fennia.126176\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fennia-International Journal of Geography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11143/fennia.126176","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在Hilde Refstie及时而有说服力的《重新配置研究相关性》(reconfigure research relevance)一书出版后引发的辩论中,我建议更仔细地研究一下将学术界、其他机构和私营部门参与者束缚在合作和研究合作生产网络中的资助结构,这种资助结构通常被认为是功能失调的。我特别关注通过授予短期“项目”来分配财政和劳动力资源的竞争性融资投标,特别是欧盟(EU)项目。根据我目前与Nadine Hassouneh共同领导、坦佩雷大学通力基金会资助的关于“项目经济”的研究工作,我提出了两个初步建议,扩展了Fennia主持的讨论中迄今为止提出的一些观点。首先,基于项目的研究经费是一个比我们想象的更政治化和强制性的工具。其次,项目管理和基于项目的工作,以及与之相关的(性别化和种族化的)不稳定甚至虐待模式,比我们通常认为的学术界的“新自由主义化”有着更悠久、更根深蒂固的历史。作为结论,我强调了如何仔细审查资助架构,使我们的工作能够和限制我们的工作,帮助我们探索研究和政策之间的关系,超越了“新自由主义”等关键类别的限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Project management and research governance – towards a critical agenda beyond neoliberalization? – commentary to Refstie
In this contribution to the debate that followed the publication of Hilde Refstie’s timely and cogent Reconfiguring research relevance, I propose to take a closer look at the funding structures that bind academia and other institutional and private sector actors into networks of collaboration and research co-production often experienced as dysfunctional. In particular, I focus on competitive funding bids that distribute financial and labour resources by awarding short-term ‘projects’, with particular reference to European Union (EU) projects. Drawing on my current research work on the ‘project economy’, co-led with Nadine Hassouneh and funded by the KONE Foundation at Tampere University, I make two initial suggestions that expand on some of the points raised so far in the discussion hosted by Fennia. First, project-based research funding is a more politicized and coercive tool than we tend to think. Second, project management and project-based work, and the associated patterns of (gendered and racialized) precarization and even abuse, have a longer and more ingrained history than what we commonly identify as the ‘neoliberalization’ of academia. By way of conclusion, I highlight how scrutinizing the funding architectures that enable and constrain our work help us to explore the relation between research and policy, beyond the limits of critical categories such as ‘neoliberalism’.
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
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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