On Social Change and Social Science Research in Africa

1969 ◽  
Vol 12 (02) ◽  
pp. 227-235
Author(s):  
Robert L. West

Since its establishment in 1966, the Research Liaison Committee has been charged by the members of the African Studies Association with the responsibility of finding ways to strengthen collaboration among African scholars and scholars from North America engaged in African research. The R.L.C, has been the principal instrument of the African Studies Association for informing and advising its members about research projects conducted in Africa by African, American, and other scholars; about the programs and facilities of research centers and institutes located in Africa; about the policies and procedures of governments and universities in Africa with respect to research and the activities of foreign research workers; and about the special needs and priority concerns of the governmental and academic research communities in Africa. The obverse of these responsibilities has been the effort by the R.L.C, to improve the means of communication with African research centers and to increase their familiarity with the capabilities and interests of American scholars concerned with Africa, particularly in the social sciences, the humanities, and in the broad field of development research. The R.L.C. has found two principal means of carrying out these responsibilities. First, it has entered into cooperation with groups of research centers in Africa, and with councils of scholars and directors of research institutes, to enlarge the exchange of information between the scholarly communities of Africa and North America; a notable example is the collaboration with the Council of Directors of Economic and Social Research Institutes in Africa (CODESRIA), whose chairman, Dr. H. M. A. Onitiri of the University of Ibadan, visited major centers of African studies in the United States in the spring of 1969 as a guest of the African Studies Association.

1970 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 421-456
Author(s):  
A. P. M. Coxon ◽  
Patrick Doreian ◽  
Robin Oakley ◽  
Ian B. Stephen ◽  
Bryan R. Wilson ◽  
...  

1997 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 69-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Rappert

Recent times have seen a significant reorientation in public funding for academic research across many countries. Public bodies in the UK have been at the forefront of such activities, typically justified in terms of a need to meet the challenges of international competitiveness and improve quality of life. One set of mechanisms advanced for further achieving these goals is the incorporation of users’ needs into various aspects of the research process. This paper examines some of the consequences of greater user involvement in the UK Economic and Social Research Council by drawing on both empirical evidence and more speculative argumentation. In doing so it poses some of the dilemmas for conceptualizing proper user involvement.


1970 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-138
Author(s):  
L. P. Hartzler

This two-day conference, sponsored by Stanford's Committee on African Studies, was possibly the first gathering of its kind outside Liberia since the American Colonisation Society ceased sending emigrants to the West African Republic at the turn of the century. It was organised by Dr Martin Lowenkopf, and was attended by over 40 social scientists, including six Liberians at present studying in the United States.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1&2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jia Li Huang

Since the 1990s, many education researchers and policy makers worldwide have reviewed education research to attempt to provide strategies to improve the quality of such research in their countries. Taiwan’s government has launched policies and funded support to set the benchmark for Taiwan’s leading universities in international academic competition. The external environment of global competition based on research policy influences the ecosystem of social science research production. To assure the quality of education policy, peer review from within the education community is one approach to supplementing the government’s governance, including the establishment of research institutes, promotion, rewards, and research value. This study tracked the mode of academic research and provides an overview of the status of academic education research in Taiwan. Because education research is part of the humanities and social sciences fields, this study identified the challenges in educational research by examining the trend of social science research and by analyzing research organizations, policy, and the evaluation of research performance. Due to the environment of education research in Taiwan is not friendly to education researcher to accumulate papers in SSCI or international journal, additional concerns entail how education research communities can develop and agree on its quality.


1965 ◽  
Vol 8 (01) ◽  
pp. 29-42
Author(s):  
Robert A. Lystad

It is the purpose of this paper to summarize briefly the nature of current and prospective social science research on Africa conducted by the nongovernment research community. Part I is devoted to a brief description of the attitudes and aims of the private researcher and to some general considerations about his past accomplishments and present concerns in the field of African Studies. Part II discusses African research in each of five disciplines: political science, anthropology, economics, psychology, and education. Chief sources for the paper are the relevant chapters of the forthcoming book The African World: A Survey of Social Research, edited by Robert A. Lystad for the African Studies Association (New York, Frederick A. Praeger, Inc., April 20, 1965). This paper is reproduced by the kind permission of Frederick A. Praeger, Inc. The authors of the chapters used as references in this paper are: Political Science, Harvey Glickman, Haverford College; Anthropology, Philip Gulliver, School of Oriental and African Studies; Economics, Andrew M. Kamarck, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development; Psychology, Leonard Doob, Yale University; Education, David Scanlon, Columbia Teachers College. The present writer is solely responsible for the presentation and interpretation of their materials as they appear in this paper.


Africa ◽  
1956 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-276
Author(s):  
J. H. M. Beattie

Opening ParagraphA good deal of ethnographic and sociological research has recently been undertaken, or is planned or currently in progress, in the four East African Territories of Uganda, Tanganyika, Kenya, and Zanzibar. This research is being and has been carried out under a number of different auspices. These include, as well as the East African Institute of Social Research at Kampala (which has organized and directed a large part of the research so far undertaken), universities and other sponsoring bodies in England and the United States (such as the Colonial Social Science Research Council, the ‘Scarbrough’ Committee, and the Goldsmiths' Company in England, and the Ford, Fulbright, and Carnegie foundations in America), Makerere College, the East African Statistical Department, and the territorial Governments themselves.


1993 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 237-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. C. Musambachime

G. K. Gwassa states that research institutes in Africa constitute one critical factor of development in that they have to undertake the twin problems of research which involve the search for and the discovery of the process of social development. They also undertake purposeful functional research by (especially) studying and analyzing internal economic and social conditions in order to determine the characteristics, variables, and criteria for rational economic and political actions within a given country. These have become the functions of many social science research institutions in sub-Saharan Africa. The pioneer in all this is the University of Zambia's Institute for African Studies, the oldest social science-oriented research center in black Africa.The Institute was founded in 1938 as the Rhodes-Livingstone Institute for Social Research (RLISR). In its fifty years of existence the Institute has made contributions which have earned it an international reputation for its research work. The aim of this paper is to assess the contribution of the Institute to social science research in its first fifty years of existence. In undertaking this task, I propose to discuss the topic under three broad areas: foundation, aims, and objectives; publication and research; and problems encountered and their solution.


1998 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 415-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
DESMOND KING

In the twenty years after 1945 both the United States and Britain created public funding regimes for social science, through the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Social Science Research Council (SSRC) respectively. The historical and political contexts in which these institutions were founded differed, but the assumptions about social science concurred. This article uses archival sources to explain this comparative pattern. It is argued that the political context in both countries played a key role in the development of the two research agencies. In each country the need politically to stress the neutrality of social research – though for different reasons in each case – produced a bias towards positivist scientific methodology, untempered by ideology. This propensity created the trajectory upon which each country's public funding regime rests.


Author(s):  
Mats Alvesson ◽  
Yiannis Gabriel ◽  
Roland Paulsen

This book argues that we are currently witnessing not merely a decline in the quality of social science research, but a proliferation of meaningless research of no value to society and modest value to its authors—apart from securing employment and promotion. The explosion of published outputs, at least in social science, creates a noisy, cluttered environment which makes meaningful research difficult, as different voices compete to capture the limelight even briefly. Older, but more impressive contributions are easily neglected as the premium is to write and publish, not read and learn. The result is a widespread cynicism among academics on the value of academic research, sometimes including their own. Publishing comes to be seen as a game of hits and misses, devoid of intrinsic meaning and value and of no wider social uses whatsoever. This is what the book views as the rise of nonsense in academic research, which represents a serious social problem. It undermines the very point of social science. This problem is far from ‘academic’. It affects many areas of social and political life entailing extensive waste of resources and inflated student fees as well as costs to taxpayers. The book’s second part offers a range of proposals aimed at restoring meaning at the heart of social science research, and drawing social science back, address the major problems and issues that face our societies.


Author(s):  
Simeon J. Yates ◽  
Jordana Blejmar

Two workshops were part of the final steps in the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) commissioned Ways of Being in a Digital Age project that is the basis for this Handbook. The ESRC project team coordinated one with the UK Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (ESRC-DSTL) Workshop, “The automation of future roles”; and one with the US National Science Foundation (ESRC-NSF) Workshop, “Changing work, changing lives in the new technological world.” Both workshops sought to explore the key future social science research questions arising for ever greater levels of automation, use of artificial intelligence, and the augmentation of human activity. Participants represented a wide range of disciplinary, professional, government, and nonprofit expertise. This chapter summarizes the separate and then integrated results. First, it summarizes the central social and economic context, the method and project context, and some basic definitional issues. It then identifies 11 priority areas needing further research work that emerged from the intense interactions, discussions, debates, clustering analyses, and integration activities during and after the two workshops. Throughout, it summarizes how subcategories of issues within each cluster relate to central issues (e.g., from users to global to methods) and levels of impacts (from wider social to community and organizational to individual experiences and understandings). Subsections briefly describe each of these 11 areas and their cross-cutting issues and levels. Finally, it provides a detailed Appendix of all the areas, subareas, and their specific questions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document