Hidden in Plain Sight: The Impact of Generic Governance on the Emergence of Research Fields
National science policies for emerging fields and science studies investigating them tend to focus on the select few fields that are sufficiently distinct to become a target of interest. This focus tends to exclude from scrutiny the earliest stages of emergence as well as general background conditions produced by generic governance. The aim of our paper is to contribute to the exploration of the local configuration of new research fields by answering the question how generic governance structures and processes affect the earliest developmental stages of new fields, namely the emergence and early diffusion of new research practices. We use a comparative study of the diffusion of a new research practice – the experimental realisation of Βose-Einstein condensation in Germany and the Netherlands – for an exploration of how national systems of governance shape the opportunities for researchers to change their research practices and to begin new lines of research.
KeywordsGeneric governance Authority relations Protected space Scientific communities Research funding structures Funding agencies Experimental physics
- Cambrosio, A., and P. Keating. 1995. Exquisite specificity: The monoclonal antibody revolution. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Edge, D., and M.J. Mulkay. 1976. Astronomy transformed: The emergence of radio astronomy in Britain. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Gläser, J., and G. Laudel. 2013. Life with and without coding: Two methods for early-stage data analysis in qualitative research aiming at causal explanations [96 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 14(2), Art. 5, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs130254.
- Gläser, J., and G. Laudel. 2015. A bibliometric reconstruction of research trails for qualitative investigations of scientific innovations. Historical Social Research 40: 299–330.Google Scholar
- Gläser, J., E. Aljets, E. Lettkemann, and G. Laudel. 2014. Where to go for a change: The impact of authority structures in universities and public research institutes on changes of research practices. In Organisational transformation and scientific change, ed. R. Whitley and J. Gläser, 297–330. Emerald: Bingley.Google Scholar
- Griffin, A. 2004. The first BEC conference in Levico in 1993. Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 37 (7), http://iopscience.iop.org/0953-4075/37/7/E02/.
- Hollingsworth, J.R. 2008. Scientific discoveries: An institutionalist and path-dependent perspective. In Biomedicine in the twentieth century: Practices, policies, and politics, ed. C. Hannaway, 317–353. Bethesda: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
- Hullmann, A. 2008. Nano and converging sciences and technologies, European Commission, DG Research, http://cordis.europa.eu/nanotechnology.
- Knorr Cetina, K. 1995. Laboratory studies. The cultural approach to the study of science. In Handbook of science and technology studies, ed. S. Jasanoff, G.E. Markle, J.C. Petersen, and T. Pinch, 140–166. London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Krohn, W., and J. Weyer. 1994. Society as a laboratory: The social risks of experimental research. Science and Public Policy 21: 173–183.Google Scholar
- Lal, B., M.E. Hughes, S. Shipp, E.C. Lee, A.M. Richards, and A. Zhu. 2011. Outcome evaluation of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director’s Pioneer Award (NDPA), FY 2004–2005. Washington: IDA Science and Technology Policy Institute.Google Scholar
- Latour, B., and S. Woolgar. 1986. Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Laudel, G., and J. Gläser. 2007. Interviewing scientists. Science, Technology & Innovation Studies 3(2): 91–111. http://www.sti-studies.de/ojs/index.php/sti/article/view/89.
- Laudel, G., E. Lettkemann, R. Ramuz, L. Wedlin, and R. Woolley. 2014. Cold atoms—hot research: High risks, high rewards in five different authority structures. In Organisational transformation and scientific change: The impact of institutional restructuring on universities and intellectual innovation, Research in the sociology of organizations, vol. 42, ed. R. Whitley and J. Gläser, 203–234. Bingley: Emerald Group.Google Scholar
- Whitley, R. 1974. Cognitive and social institutionalization of scientific specialties and research areas. In Social processes of scientific development, ed. R. Whitley, 69–95. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
- Whitley, R. 2000 . The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
- Whitley, R. 2014. How do institutional changes affect scientific innovations? The effects of shifts in authority relationships, protected space, and flexibility. In Organisational transformation and scientific change: The impact of institutional restructuring on universities and intellectual innovation, Research in the sociology of organizations, vol. 42, ed. R. Whitley and J. Gläser, 367–406. Bingley: Emerald Group.Google Scholar
- Whitley, R., and J. Gläser (eds.). 2014. Organisational transformation and scientific change: The impact of institutional restructuring on universities and intellectual innovation, Research in the sociology of organizations, vol. 42. Bingley: Emerald Group.Google Scholar