Upload
bernadine-wolf
View
31
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Contentious Knowledge. Science, Social Science and Social Movements. Contentious Knowledge Team. 2006-09 Contentious Knowledge Team Members. Ronald Herring (Government) Kenneth M. Roberts (Government) Maria Cook ( ILR - International & Comparative Labor) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Contentious KnowledgeContentious Knowledge
Science, Social Science and Social Movements Science, Social Science and Social Movements
Contentious Knowledge Team
Ronald Herring (Government) Kenneth M. Roberts (Government) Maria Cook (ILR - International & Comparative Labor) Jason Frank (Government) Durba Ghosh (History)Rebecca Givan (ILR - Collective Bargaining) Stephen Hilgartner (Science and Technology Studies)Tom Medvetz (UC San Diego - Sociology)Kyoko Sato (Harvard – Sociology)Sarah A. Soule(Stanford - Graduate School of Business) Susan Spronk (University of Ottawa – International Development and Global Studies)Janice Thies (Crop and Soil Sciences)
2006-09 Contentious Knowledge Team Members
Our Starting Point
SCIENCESOCIAL
SCIENCE
AUTHORITATIVE KNOWLEDGE
SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
POLICY
Presentation Overview
Our Model of Knowledge and Policy-making Processes
Our Starting Point
SCIENCESOCIAL
SCIENCE
AUTHORITATIVE KNOWLEDGE
SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
POLICY
ENGAGED SOCIAL ACTORS
KNOWLEDGE MAKING PROCESS
Knowledge and Policy Making
Considered
Counter-A
K Trajecto
ry
Policy Making ProcessPolicy Making Process
Policy A
BC
D
Policy X
AK Trajectory
Policy Y
COUNTER
CLAIMS
AK CLAIMS
Institutional
Outcome
Our Model of Knowledge and Policy-making Processes
Knowledge-Making Process
Interest
Groups
Social Movement
s
Scientists
Business
Groups
Think Tanks
Politics of Knowledge Making
Our Model of Knowledge and Policy-making Processes
Knowledge-Making Process
Interest
Groups
Social Movement
s
Scientists
Business
Groups
Think Tanks
Knowledge-Making Process
Interest
Groups
Social Movement
s
Scientists
Business
Groups
Think Tanks
Our Model of Knowledge and Policy-making Processes
KNOWLEDGE CLAIMS(e.g. Anthropogenic Climate Change)
AUTHORITATIVE KNOWLEDGE
COUNTER-CLAIMS TO
AUTHORITATIVE KNOWLEDGE
Social Movement
s
Knowledge-Making Process
Interest
Groups
Social Movement
s
Scientists
Business
Groups
Think Tanks
AK Policy TrajectoryCou
nter
-AK
Polic
y Tr
aj.
KNOWLEDGE CLAIMS(e.g. Anthropogenic Climate Change)
AK CLAIMSCOUNTER-AK
CLAIMS
Knowledge-Making Process
Interest
Groups
Social Movement
s
Scientists
Business
Groups
Think Tanks
AK Policy TrajectoryCou
nter
-AK
Polic
y Tr
aj.
KNOWLEDGE CLAIMS(e.g. Anthropogenic Climate Change)
AK CLAIMSCOUNTER-AK
CLAIMS
Knowledge-Making Process
Interest
Groups
Social Movement
s
Scientists
Business
Groups
Think Tanks
AK Policy TrajectoryCou
nter
-AK
Polic
y Tr
aj.
KNOWLEDGE CLAIMS(e.g. Anthropogenic Climate Change)
AK CLAIMSCOUNTER-AK
CLAIMS
Knowledge-Making Process
Interest
Groups
Social Movement
s
Scientists
Business
Groups
Think Tanks
AK Policy TrajectoryCou
nter
-AK
Polic
y Tr
aj.
KNOWLEDGE CLAIMS(e.g. Anthropogenic Climate Change)
AK CLAIMSCOUNTER-AK
CLAIMS
Knowledge Making Process
Interest
Groups
Social Movement
s
Scientists
Business
Groups
Think Tanks
AK Policy TrajectoryCou
nter
-AK
Polic
y Tr
aj.
KNOWLEDGE CLAIMS(e.g. Anthropogenic Climate Change)
AK CLAIMSCOUNTER-AK
CLAIMS
ENGAGED SOCIAL ACTORS
Considered
Counter-A
K Policy Tra
j.
Policy Making ProcessPolicy Making Process
Policy A
BC
D
Policy X
AK Trajectory
Policy Y
COUNTER
CLAIMS
AK CLAIMS
Institutional
Outcome
ENGAGED SOCIAL ACTORS
ENGAGED SOCIAL ACTORS
KNOWLEDGE MAKING PROCESS
Knowledge and Policy Making
Considered
Counter-A
K Policy Tra
j.
Policy Making ProcessPolicy Making Process
Policy A
BC
D
Policy X
AK Trajectory
Policy Y
COUNTER
CLAIMS
AK CLAIMS
Institutional
Outcome
Think Tanks
Social Movements
Workshop on Contentious Knowledge & the Diffusion of Social Protest
November 9-10, 2007 423 ILR Conference Center, Cornell University
The Diffusion of Social Movements: Actors, Frames, and Political Effects. Rebecca Kolins Givan, Kenneth Roberts and Sarah Soule, Eds.
Forthcoming, Cambridge University Press.
Social Movements
Table of Contents Part I: Diffusion and the Framing of Contentious Politics Part II: Mechanisms of Diffusion Part III: Diffusion, Scale Shift, and Organizational Change
The Diffusion of Social Movements: Actors, Frames
Biotechnology
Puzzle: A Persistent Global Cognitive Rift on Biotechnology
With the widespread adoption of GMO seeds, a major transition has occurred in the structure and history of settled agriculture since its inception 10,000 years ago. … This destructive pattern – invariably resulting in famine – is replicated in country after country leading to the Worldwide demise of the peasant economy. - Michel Chossudovsky Global Research, May 2, 2008
Global Famine Moralists of the world - unite!
http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archives/2008/05/global_famine.html
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Global Area of Transgenic Crops, 1996 to 2007:Industrial and Developing Countries (Million Hectares)
Total
Industrial
Developing
Source: Adapted from James, 2008
Global Diffusion of Transgenic Crops, by Area: 1996-2007
Reciprocal Diffusion of GMO-Free Zones (Europe)
European Regions to Sign a "GMO-free Resolution" by political unit, 2007 & 2009
2007 2009 % Change
Region¹ 167 196 14.8
Provinces, Prefectures & Departments 53 93 43.0
Local Governments 4,278 4,567 6.3
Individuals 27,100 30,370 10.8
Source: www.gmo-free-regions.org. Accessed April 2009
¹ As defined by the Asembly of European Regions (AER)
GMO-free Zones: Europe 2007
GMO-free Zones: Europe 2009
A Contentious-Knowledge Take on the Dialectical Diffusion Puzzle
Steep technology diffusion curve explicable Material-interest-based market ties among
agriculturalists Permeable state-surveillance and control =>
stealth seeds globally Effective ideational opposition less self-
evident Cartagena Protocol [2000/2003] on bio-safety
enables choke points in every nation Epistemic brokers mediate authoritative
knowledge TANs supply authoritative risk narratives/data NGOs supply confirming risk narratives/data
Epistemic Brokers as Hinges between Networks: The Case of Bt Cotton in India
Monsanto’s Terminator Gene; MNC Patents
Canadian website [RAFI]
Transnational Advocacy NetworkAffiliated NGO Networks
Epistemic BrokersCSA, DDS, Navdanya
Bt Cotton DisastersDead Sheep, Suicides
Prince Charles: “I blame GMcrops for farmer suicides in India” October 2008
Local NGO Projects/Mvts[CROPS Jangaon]
Truth Claims
Truth Claims
M 1:25 - 4:25 pm Myron Taylor Hall Seminar Room
4 creditsProfessors: Ron Herring and Janice Thies
The Washington Consensus and Social Protest in Latin America
What Was the Washington Consensus?
Package of free market reforms— trade liberalization, privatization, liberalization of capital and labor markets, etc.
Policy response to the Latin American debt crisis of the 1980’s
Market Reform in Latin Market Reform in Latin AmericaAmerica
What Made it Authoritative Knowledge?
Grounded in neoclassical economic theory (especially the monetarist orthodoxy of the Chicago school)
Strong support (and pressure) from U.S. government and international financial institutions (IMF, World Bank, private banks, etc.)
Policy design and implementation by Latin American “technocrats” (experts with post-graduate training in neoclassical economics in the U.S.), often under the purview of the IMF
Social Sciences as Source of Authoritative Knowledge Highly contested or inconclusive
empirical claims
“Bundling” of empirical claims in larger bodies of knowledge with normative or ideological underpinnings
Markets are the most efficient mechanism to allocate scarce assets and resources
State intervention distorts market signals and creates economic inefficiency
Central Empirical Claims of Neoclassical Economics
“Not only have individual financial institutions become less vulnerable to shocks from underlying risk factors, but also the financial system as a whole has become more resilient.” — Alan Greenspan in 2004
“This modern risk-management paradigm held sway for decades. The whole intellectual edifice, however, collapsed in the summer of last year. . . Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders’ equity, myself included, are in a state of shocked disbelief.”
Alan Greenspan, 2008, testifying before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
“You had the authority to prevent irresponsible lending practices that led to the subprime mortgage crisis. You were advised to do so by many others,” said Representative Henry A. Waxman of California, chairman of the committee. “Do you feel that your ideology pushed you to make decisions that you wish you had not made?”
Mr. Greenspan conceded: “Yes, I’ve found a flaw. I don’t know how significant or permanent it is. But I’ve been very distressed by that fact.”
Washington Consensus
Social and Political Backlash to Washington Consensus
Revival of social mobilization and protest (overthrow of pro-market governments in Argentina, Ecuador, and Bolivia)
Election of new leftist presidents in 10 countries representing 2/3 of Latin America’s population
Types of Counter-Claims
Direct counter-claims-- challenge central empirical claims
(for example, questioning the ability of the economic model to generate growth and financial stability)
“Unpacking” counter-claims-- Disaggregate authoritative claims,
shift the level of analysis (e.g., emphasis on social group or sectoral effects rather than aggregate outcomes– for example, the effects of privatization on workers or municipal water supplies)
Types of Counter-Claims
Orthogonal counter-claims-- reframe the issue agenda (i.e., shift
to a different set of issues)Examples: Social inequality/injustice frame (distribution of costs
and benefits) Local/national autonomy frame (control over natural
resources) Democracy/popular sovereignty frame (opposition to
technocratic policymaking)
Types of Counter-Claims
Critique of neoliberal globalization as “master counter-frame” incorporating all the above, allowing broad-based social and political coalitions
Master Counter-Frame
Less rooted in productive relations and class-based collective action
Greater orientation toward consumption and social services, ethnic identities, and territorial organization
Opposition Coalitions: New Social Bases
Decline of centralized, hierarchical party and union organizations
Pluralization of social actors New associational networks– loose
linkages between NGO’s, community organizations, indigenous movements, etc.
Opposition Coalitions: New Organizational Brokers
Social Protests in Bolivia
The Framing of Counter-Claims
Group or sectoral economic interests (labor, etc.) Macro-level performance failures (limited growth, financial
instability) Social inequality/injustice frame (distribution of costs and
benefits) Local/national autonomy frame (control over natural
resources) Democracy/popular sovereignty frame (opposition to
technocratic policymaking)
Critique of neoliberal globalization as “master frame” incorporating all the above, allowing broad-based social and political coalitions
Concluding Notes: