LIST OF PANELS

The governance of knowledge – generation, organisation, or dissemination – has now permeated all policy levels, from the local, national, regional to the global. These processes, however, are studied across diverse disciplines – science and higher education (policy) studies, international relations, comparative politics, sociology and organisational studies – often disconnected from one another. This is surprising given that there are at least three clear research foci they have in common. At the level of (i) discourse and ideas, attention is paid to whether, how, and why concepts such as excellence, globalism and regionalism, innovation, to name but a few, percolate into daily practices and how they are then weaved into the fabric of policies, organisations or systems. Similarly, these disciplines have in common their interests in how the dynamics of higher education, research and science have impacted (ii) the central organisations, i.e. universities and non-university research institutes, as well as the funding and regulatory agencies. Finally, there is also clear shared research interest in how such dynamics have affected (iii) groups and individuals as members of these organisations, e.g. asking whether and how the normalisation of universities or their global differentiation/isomorphism clash with the normative foundations of science as a profession/vocation or, even earlier, with the hitherto humanistic ideals of ‘socialising’ students by education.   This panel invites researchers from across diverse disciplines to examine the multi-level governance of knowledge policies and politics, focusing on any of the above-mentioned dynamics as well as the role of actors in influencing them. Submitted papers should be clearly linked to one of the three sections – each addressing one of the three research foci identified. All accepted papers must have a clear conceptual approach, preferably supported by empirical examples beyond a single case study.

The governance of knowledge policies has now permeated all policy levels, from the local, national, regional to the global. These processes, however, are examined in disciplinary ‘silos’ – from science and higher education (policy) studies, international relations, comparative politics, and sociology to organisational studies. At the same time, they share at least three research foci, each one echoing stimulating debates within public policy research. Firstly, this panel demonstrates the added-value that studies of knowledge policies have for improving public policy understanding of (i) discourse and ideas. Specifically, questions concerning whether, how and why certain concepts such as excellence, globalism, regionalism, innovation, and so on, catalyse policy actors’ strategies, percolate into daily practices and how they are then weaved into the fabric of policies, organisations or systems. Knowledge policies constitute fascinating cases for scholars willing to “take ideas and discourse seriously” (Schmidt, 2010), studying policymaking after the “argumentative turn” (Fischer & Gottweis, 2012), or, from a different angle, wanting to explore the rational-choice argument that ideas are merely “hooks” for interests (Weingast, 1995). Secondly, another research dimension on knowledge policies is to question how the dynamics of higher education, research and science have impacted (ii) the central organisations, i.e. universities and non-university research institutes, as well as the funding and regulatory agencies. This time, knowledge policies provide almost infinite cases to tackle the issue of interaction between policies and organisations – and therefore the connection between public policy research and organisational theory (Gornitzka, 1999). Seminal works in organisational sociology and implementation theory have all been fascinated by developments in higher education. For instance, Cohen, March & Olsen (1972) introduced ‘organised anarchy’ and the ‘garbage can model of decision-making’ to conceptualise processes of organisation within universities, while Cerych & Sabatier (1986) studied implementation of higher education in Europe. Their interest, especially on the role of ambiguity in policymaking, points to the potential that researching dynamics of knowledge policymaking has for addressing questions at the policy-organisation nexus. Finally, there is also clear shared research interest in how such policy dynamics affect (iii) groups and individuals as “difficult” members (Mintzberg, 1983) of such professional organisations, e.g. asking whether and how a potential “normalization” of universities (Brunsson & Sahlin-Andersson, 2000; Musselin, 2007) and their global differentiation/isomorphism clash with the normative foundations of science as a profession/vocation (Merton, 1973; Weber, 1946) or, even earlier, with the hitherto humanistic ideals of ‘socialising’ students by education. This panel invites researchers from across diverse disciplines to examine the multi-level governance of knowledge policies and politics, focusing on any of the above-mentioned dynamics as well as the role of actors in influencing them. We propose three sections – each addressing one of the three research foci identified above. All accepted papers must have a clear conceptual approach, preferably supported by empirical examples beyond a single case study. Brunsson, N. & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2000). Constructing Organizations: The Example of Public Sector Reform. In: Organization Studies, 21(4): 721-746. Cerych, L. & Sabatier, P. (1986). Great Expectations and Mixed Performance. The Implementation of Higher Education Reforms in Europe. Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham books. Clark, B.R. (1983): The Higher Education System. Academic Organization in Cross-National Perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press. Cohen, M.D., March, J.G. & Olsen, J.P. (1972): "A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice". Administrative Science Quarterly 17(1): 1-25. Fischer, F. & Gottweis, H. (eds.) (2012): The Argumentative Turn Revisited: Public Policy as Communicative Practice. Durham: Duke University Press. Gornitzka, Å. (1999). "Governmental policies and organisational change in higher education." Higher Education 38(1): 5-31. Merton, R. K. (1973[1942]): The Normative Structure of Science. In: R. K. Merton (ed.): The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Mintzberg, H. (1983): Power in and around Organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Musselin, C. (2007): Are Universities Specific Organisations? In: G. Krücken, A. Kosmützky, M. Torka (Eds.): Towards a Multiversity? Universities between Global Trends and National Traditions. Bielefeld: transcript, 63-84. Schmidt, V. A. (2010). “Taking ideas and discourse seriously: explaining change through discursive institutionalism as the fourth ‘new institutionalism’”. European Political Science Review 2: 1-25. Weber, M. (1946[1922]): Science as a Vocation. In: H.H. Gerth & C. Wright Mills (transl./eds.), Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 129-156. Weingast, B. R. (1995). “A Rational Choice Perspective on the Role of Ideas: Shared Belief Systems and State Sovereignty in International Cooperation”. Politics & Society 23(4): 449-464.