IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v5y2019i1d10.1057_s41599-019-0281-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutionalizing applied humanities: enabling a stronger role for the humanities in interdisciplinary research for public policy

Author

Listed:
  • Frans W. A. Brom

    (Utrecht University
    Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR))

Abstract

What can society expect from the humanities? This question is even more pressing in the discussion on the contribution of the humanities in interdisciplinary research that supports public policy in dealing with societal issues. In the science-based policy community of—mostly natural—scientists, it is clear that there are limitations in natural science approaches to public policy. This community looks at the ‘other’ disciplines in academia, including the humanities, to overcome these limitations. An analysis of these limitations as actual limits, boundaries, and necessary bounds clarifies what science advisers need from the humanities: to contextualize decontextualized science advice. Unfortunately, there is little structural dialogue between the humanities and the science advice community. One reason for this is the idea held by the humanities that its public task is to unmask power structures rather than to support them. Another reason is the lack of institutional power to engage in practical discussions on policy problems. If the humanities really want to engage in a productive conversation on its societal relevance, they should develop the idea of social impact beyond that of knowledge utilization of specific and individual projects. For many fields of science application, there are institutions in which subject-specific research is combined with knowledge-intensive policy service. The humanities need institutions for applied humanities in order to develop perspectives that help society to cope with important societal challenges.

Suggested Citation

  • Frans W. A. Brom, 2019. "Institutionalizing applied humanities: enabling a stronger role for the humanities in interdisciplinary research for public policy," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:5:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-019-0281-2
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-019-0281-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-019-0281-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-019-0281-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Gluckman & James Wilsdon, 2016. "From paradox to principles: where next for scientific advice to governments?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 2(1), pages 1-4, December.
    2. Christina Boswell & Katherine Smith, 2017. "Rethinking policy ‘impact’: four models of research-policy relations," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(1), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Julie A. Caswell, 2000. "An evaluation of risk analysis as applied to agricultural biotechnology (with a case study of gmo labeling)," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 115-123.
    4. Koenig, Thomas, 2019. "SSH-Impact Pathways and SSH-Integration in EU Research Framework Programmes," IHS Working Paper Series 5, Institute for Advanced Studies.
    5. Robert Doubleday & James Wilsdon, 2012. "Beyond the great and good," Nature, Nature, vol. 485(7398), pages 301-302, May.
    6. Kate Crowley & Brian W. Head, 2017. "The enduring challenge of ‘wicked problems’: revisiting Rittel and Webber," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(4), pages 539-547, December.
    7. Oecd, 2015. "Scientific Advice for Policy Making: The Role and Responsibility of Expert Bodies and Individual Scientists," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers 21, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yuwan Malakar & Justine Lacey & Paul M Bertsch, 2022. "Towards responsible science and technology: How nanotechnology research and development is shaping risk governance practices in Australia," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-14, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Steve Connelly & Dave Vanderhoven & Robert Rutherfoord & Liz Richardson & Peter Matthews, 2021. "Translating research for policy: the importance of equivalence, function, and loyalty," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.
    2. Noam Obermeister, 2020. "Tapping into science advisers’ learning," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-9, December.
    3. Peter Horton & Garrett W. Brown, 2018. "Integrating evidence, politics and society: a methodology for the science–policy interface," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-5, December.
    4. Heath Greville & William House & Stella Tarrant & Sandra C. Thompson, 2023. "Addressing Complex Social Problems Using the Lens of Family Violence: Valuable Learning from the First Year of an Interdisciplinary Community of Practice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-16, February.
    5. Haas, Peter M., 2018. "Preserving the epistemic authority of science in world politics," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2018-105, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    6. Kynda R. Curtis & Klaus Moeltner, 2007. "The effect of consumer risk perceptions on the propensity to purchase genetically modified foods in Romania," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 263-278.
    7. Roman Fudickar & Hanna Hottenrott & Cornelia Lawson, 2018. "What’s the price of academic consulting? Effects of public and private sector consulting on academic research," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(4), pages 699-722.
    8. Schmidt, Stefan & Seppelt, Ralf, 2018. "Information content of global ecosystem service databases and their suitability for decision advice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 22-40.
    9. Fudickar, Roman & Hottenrott, Hanna & Lawson, Cornelia, 2016. "What’s the price of consulting? Effects of public and private sector consulting on academic research," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201602, University of Turin.
    10. Foley, Conor & Droog, Elsa & Healy, Orla & McHugh, Sheena & Buckley, Claire & Browne, John Patrick, 2017. "Understanding perspectives on major system change: A comparative case study of public engagement and the implementation of urgent and emergency care system reconfiguration," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(7), pages 800-808.
    11. Peter D. Gluckman & Anne Bardsley & Matthias Kaiser, 2021. "Brokerage at the science–policy interface: from conceptual framework to practical guidance," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, December.
    12. Pita Spruijt & Anne B. Knol & Arthur C. Petersen & Erik Lebret, 2019. "Expert Views on Their Role as Policy Advisor: Pilot Study for the Cases of Electromagnetic Fields, Particulate Matter, and Antimicrobial Resistance," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(5), pages 968-974, May.
    13. Schmeiser, Steven, 2014. "Consumer inference and the regulation of consumer information," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 192-200.
    14. Grimsrud, Kristine M. & McCluskey, Jill J. & Loureiro, Maria L. & Wahl, Thomas I., 2002. "Consumer Attitudes Towards Genetically Modified Foods In Norway," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19818, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    15. Mark C. Quigley & Luke G. Bennetts & Patricia Durance & Petra M. Kuhnert & Mark D. Lindsay & Keith G. Pembleton & Melanie E. Roberts & Christopher J. White, 2019. "The provision and utility of earth science to decision-makers: synthesis and key findings," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 349-367, September.
    16. Crespi, John M. & Marette, Stephan, 2003. "Some Economic Implications Of Public Labeling," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(3), pages 1-12, November.
    17. Sokolovska, Nataliia & Fecher, Benedikt & Wagner, Gert G., 2019. "Communication on the Science-Policy Interface: An Overview of Conceptual Models," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 7(4).
    18. McCluskey, Jill J. & Loureiro, Maria L., 2003. "Consumer Preferences And Willingness To Pay For Food Labeling: A Discussion Of Empirical Studies," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(3), pages 1-8, November.
    19. Aobo Jiang & Erin & Yu-Ching Lin, 2018. "Research On The Development Of Science And Technology Network Industry Based On Structural Equation Modeling," Journal of Mechanical Engineering Research & Developments (JMERD), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 41(3), pages 82-90, September.
    20. Oehmke, James F. & Maredia, Mywish K. & Weatherspoon, Dave D., 2001. "The Effects of Biotechnology Policy on Trade and Growth," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 2(2), pages 1-14.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:5:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-019-0281-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.