فهم دوگانه آزادی-پاسخگویی در حکمرانی پژوهش

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشکده معارف اسلامی و مدیریت، دانشگاه امام صادق، تهران، ایران

2 استادیار، گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشکده معارف اسلامی و مدیریت، دانشگاه امام صادق تهران، ایران

3 دانشیار، گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشکده معارف اسلامی و مدیریت، دانشگاه امام صادق، تهران، ایران.

4 استاد، گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران

چکیده

هدایت پژوهش و تغییر محتوای آن به‌وسیله کنشگران داخل و خارج از جامعه علمی، پدیده‌ای است که مورد توجه بسیاری از پژوهشگران حوزه حکمرانی پژوهش قرار گرفته است. هدف پژوهش حاضر توصیف بخشی از این پژوهش‌ها برای فهم چگونگی حکمرانی پژوهش است. این توصیف در رفت‌وبرگشت با چارچوبی مبنایی‌تر یعنی دوگانه آزادی-پاسخگویی شکل گرفته است. بدین ترتیب با اتخاذ رویکرد مرور روایتی، پس از بیان استدلالی در خصوص امکان حکمرانی پژوهش، عمده مباحث حول چگونگی چینش نظام روابط اقتدار در عرصه پژوهش با نگاه به دوگانه مذکور طرح شده است. این دوگانه که در یک‌سوی آن استقلال و آزادی علمی (ضرورت خود-تخصیصی وظایف پژوهشی توسط خود پژوهشگر) قرار گرفته و سوی دیگر آن پاسخگویی و مسئولیت‌پذیری پژوهش (انطباق با انتظارات بیرونی از پژوهش) است، به‌صورت تاریخی تحلیل شده و روند تبدیل شدن این رابطه متناقض‌نما به یک رابطه تعاملی و مکمل همدیگر تشریح شده است. درنهایت هفت خط پژوهشی از تجلی آن در شکل‌گیری سازوکارهای حکمرانی پژوهش احصاء شده که ویژگی مشترک همه آن‌ها نوعی از اعمال نفوذ در امر پژوهش در عین حفظ ضرورت کارکردی آن (استقلال پژوهش) است.  

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Understanding Freedom-Accountability Duality in Governance of Research

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mojtaba Javadi 1
  • Mojtaba Emami 2
  • Ali Asghar Khandan 3
  • Morteza Javanaliazar 3
  • Hassan Danaeefard 4
1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Islamic Studies and Management, Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Islamic Studies and Management, Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran
3 Associate Professor, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Islamic Studies and Management, Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran.
4 Professor, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Management & Economics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Guiding research and changing its content by actors inside and outside of scientific community is a phenomenon that has attracted the attention of many researchers in the field of research governance. The purpose of this research is to describe a part of these researches to understand how research is governed. This description has been formed in the reciprocating with a more basic framework, i.e. the freedom-responsibility duality. Thus, by adopting a narrative review approach, after expressing an argument about the possibility of research governance, the main discussions about manner of arranging the authority relations in the field of research have been proposed with a view to the aforementioned duality. This duality, on one side of which is independence and scientific freedom (necessity of self-assignment of research tasks by the researcher) and on the other side of which is accountability and responsibility of research (compliance with external expectations from research), has been historically analyzed and the process of shifting from a contradictory relationship to an interactive and complementary relationship is described. Finally, seven lines of research from its manifestation in the formation of research governance mechanisms have been counted that common feature of all of them is a kind of influence on research while maintaining its functional necessity (research independence).

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Governance Of Research
  • Freedom-Accountability
  • Research Independence
  • Research Accountability
  • Scientific Freedom

مراجع

[1] Javadi, M., & Emami, S. M. (2021). Governance of Research: Nature, Scope and Tools. Journal of Public Administration, 13(2), 233-276. https://doi.org/10.22059/jipa.2021.317790.2893 .{In Persian}. 
[2] Suzanchi Kashani, I. (2021): Scientific life, of engagement with society and theorizing in social sciences. Tehran: Rasa. {In Persian}.
[3] GhaziNoory, S, GhaziNoori, S (2013) An introduction to science, technology and innovation policy, Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University. {In Persian}.
[4] Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2017). Guidance on Conducting a Systematic Literature Review. Planning Education and Research, 39(1) 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17723971
[5] Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 5(3), 101–117.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60142-6
[6] Gordon, P., Richardson, W. H. (1997). Are Compact Cities a Desirable Planning Goal? Journal of the American Planning Association, 63 (1), 95–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369708975727
[7] Neuman, W.L. (2013). Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches (Hassan Danaeifard, Seyed Hossein Kazemi, Trans.) Tehran: Mehraban. {In Persian}.
[8] Bucchi, M. (2004). Science in society: An introduction to social studies of science. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203299739
[9] Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt32bbxc
[10] Parsania, H. (2013). Theory and Culture: Fundamental Methodology of Evolution of Scientific Theories, Culture strategy, 6(23), 7-28. {In Persian}
[11] Mirbagheri, S. M. M. (2010). Aspects of the Scienses from the Epistemology Viewpiont, Qom: Research Institute of Islamic Sciences and Culture. {In Persian}
[12] Kulakowski, E. C., &; Chronister, L. U. (2011). Research administration and management. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning. https://books.google.com/books?id=6Vf8tgAACAAJ 
[13] Bush, V. (2020). Science, the Endless Frontier. In Science, the Endless Frontier (pp. 43-162). Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691201658-002 .
[14] Braun, D. (2003). Lasting Tensions in research Policy-Making – A delegation problem, Science and Public Policy, 30, 309-321. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154303781780353  
[15] Stewart I. (1948). Organizing Scientific Research for War: The Administrative History of the Office of Scientific Research and Development. Boston: Little, Brown. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.5892 
[16] Glaser J & Laudel G (2016) Governing Science. European Journal Of Sociology, 57, 117-168. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975616000047 
[17] Braun, D. (1993). Who Governs Intermediary Agencies? Principal-Agent Relations in Research Policy-Making. Journal of Public Policy,13(2),135162.
 https://doi.org/10.1017/s0143814x00000994
[18] Mayntz, R., & Schimank, U. (1998). Linking theory and practice: Introduction. Research policy,27(8), 747-755. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00087-0
[19] Kleinman, D. L. (1998). Untangling Context: Understanding a University Laboratory in the Commercial World. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 23(3), 285-314. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399802300302  
[20] Glaser, Jo, Ash Mitchell, Bunstorf Guido, Hopf David, Hubenschmid Lara, Janßen Melike, Laudel Grit, Schimank Uwe, Stoll Marlene, Wilholt Torsten, Zechlin Lothar, Lieb Klaus(2022). The Independence of Research—A Review of Disciplinary Perspectives and Outline of Interdisciplinary Prospects. Minerva,60(1), 105–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-021-09451-8
[21] Wilholt T, Glimell H. (2011) Conditions Of Science: The Three-Way Tension Of Freedom, Accountability And Utility. In: Carrier M,Nordmann A. (Eds) Science In The Context Of Application. Boston Studies In The Philosophy Of Science, Vol274. Springer, Dordrecht.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9051-5_21.
[22] Bernal, J.D. (1939) The Social Function of Science. London: G. Routledge & Sons.
[23] McGucken, W. (1978) On Freedom and Planning in Science: The Society for Freedom in Science, 1940 – 46. Minerva 16 (1): 42 – 72. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01102181 
[24] Reinisch, J. (2000) The Society for Freedom in Science, 1940 – 1963. M.Sc Diss. London: University of London. https://www.academia.edu/1088487/The_Society_for_Freedom_in_Science_1940_1965
[25] Bridgman, P.W. (1947) Scientists and Social Responsibility, The Scientific Monthly,65(2):148–154. http://www.jstor.org/stable/19013
[26] Edsall, J. T. (1975). Scientific Freedom and Responsibility. Science, 188(4189), 687–693. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.11643270
[27] National Academy of Sciences (NAS), Institute of Medicine, National Research Council, & Panel on Scientific Responsibility and the Conduct of Research. (1992) Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/1864 
[28] National Academy of Sciences (NAS). (2009) On Being a Scientist: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in Research. National Academies Press (US).
 https://doi.org/10.17226/12192
[29] Akerlind, G. S., & Kayrooz, C. (2003). Understanding academic freedom: The views of social scientists. Higher Education Research & Development, 22(3): 327-344. https://doi.org/10.1080/758482627   ‏ 
[30] Miller, S, & Selgelid, M. J. (2007). Ethical and Philosophical Consideration of the Dual-use Dilemma in the Biological Sciences. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13(4), 523–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-007-9043-4
[31] American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2023) AAAS Statement on Scientific Freedom and Responsibility. Available online at https://www.aaas.org/programs/scientific-responsibility-human-rights-law/aaas-statement-scientific-freedom
[32] Douglas, H. (2021). Scientific Freedom and Social Responsibility. Science, Freedom, Democracy,68–87. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367823436-4 
[33] Schimank, U (2018): Fiction Meets Science II: Varieties Of Science Narrative, Available online at  https://www.fictionmeetsscience.org/ccm/content/projects/global-dimensions/6a-understandings-of-scientific-autonomy-and-of-the-societal-responsibility-of-science-in-science-novels-from-three-national-variants-of-the-culture-of-modernity/
[34] Kaldewey, D (2021): Autonomie und Responsivität — Forum Internationale Wissenschaft. Available online at https://www.fiw.uni-bonn.de/wissenschaftsforschung/projekte-der-abteilung/autonomie-und-responsivitaet?set_language=en
[35] Wilholt, T (2006) Scientific Autonomy And Planned Research: The Case Of Space Science. Poiesis Prax 4(4), 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10202-006-0031-6   
[36] Adam, M., Carrier, M., & Wilholt, T. (2006). How to serve the customer and still be truthful: methodological characteristics of applied research. Science and Public Policy, 33(6), 435–444. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154306781778849
[37] Braun, D., & Guston, D. H. (2003). Principal-agent theory and research policy: an introduction. Science and Public Policy, 30(5), 302–308. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154303781780290
[38] Jain, R. K, Triandis, H, Weick, C. (2010) Management Of Research And Development Organizations : Managing the Unmanageable, John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470917275
[39] Goffee, R, Jones, G. (2009), Clever : Leading Your Smartest, Most Creative People, Harvard Business Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=9RPwM8S9QrIC&oi=fnd&pg=PR1&dq=Goffee+R,+Jones+G+(2009)+Clever:+leading+your+smartest,+most+creative+people.+Harvard+Business+School+Publishing&ots=OgR8es2WAu&sig=KmFqY2tnxdrEXKOeLehv2Lb2uK0#v=onepage&q&f=false
[40] Borrás, S. (2012). Three Tensions in the Governance Of Science and Technology. Oxford Handbooks Online. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199560530.013.0030
[41] Mueller, S. (2019). Federalism and the politics of shared rule. A Research Agenda for Federalism Studies. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788112970.00018   
[42] Hendrickson, R. M, Lane, J. E, Harris, J. T., & Dorman, R. H. (2013). Academic leadership and governance of higher education : a guide for trustees, leaders, and aspiring leaders of two- and four-year institutions. First edition. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus.. https://books.google.com/books/about/Academic_Leadership_and_Governance_of_Hi.html?id=dCfxugAACAAJ
[43] Beasley, K. (1970) The Research Administrator as Mediator-Expediter. Journal of the Society of Research Administrators 2(1). https://www.srainternational.org/resources/journal
[44] Tauginienė, L. (2009). The roles of a research administrator at a university. Public Policy and Administration, 1(30), 45-56. https://vpa.ktu.lt/index.php/PPA/article/view/26907/13915
[45] Andersen, Jan (2018): Research management. Europe and beyond. London: Elsevier. Available online at
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/book/9780128050590 
[46] Dingwall, R., & McDonnell, M. B. (2015). The SAGE handbook of research management. SAGE Publications Ltd, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473914933  
[47] Shekarisaz, M., Soltani, I., & Fadavi, M. S. (2021). Designing a model to meet the needs of higher education in today's society with a knowledge commercialization approach Case study: Comprehensive and very large units of Islamic Azad University. Educational Development of Judishapur, 12(1), 296-308. https://doi.org/10.22118/edc.2021.277781.1743 {In Persian}
[48] Abbaspour, A., shakerihoseinabad, M., rahimian, H., & Farasatkhah, M. (2019). A Model for Effective Accountability at Public Universities: Mixed Method. Journal of Research in Educational Science, 13(44), 7-22 https://doi.org/10.22034/jiera.2019.85981. {In Persian}
[49] Maleki D, Navehebrahim A, Abdollahi B, Zeinabadi H.(2021) Designing an Effective Accountability Model for Islamic Azad University: a qualitative approach based on Grounded Theory. IRPHE; 26 (4) :113-142. {In Persian}
[50] Pardakhtchi M H, Bazargan A, Arasteh H, Mozafari G. (2012) Academic Society's Perceptions on University External Accountability Gap . IRPHE; 18 (1) :91-112. {In Persian}
[51] Emami Gharahhajlou, J., Salehi, M., & zameni, F. (2021). Providing a model of university independence with causal and causal approaches for university efficiency. Journal of Research in Educational Science, 15(52), 127-146.
 https://doi.org/20.1001.1.23831324.1400.15.52.9.1  {In Persian}
[52] Milani, O., Hasani, M., & Ghasemzadeh, A. (2016). The autonomy of university and its role in accountability and quality assurance of higher education system services.. Research on Educational Leadership and Management, 2(7), 147-167. https://doi.org/10.22054/jrlat.2018.17757.1266  {In Persian}
[53] Rahimi, H., & Kohpeyma, S. (2020). The Study of Antecedents and Consequences of Organizational Autonomy in Universities with an Approach to the Future (Case Study: University of Kashan). Higher Education Letter, 13(50), 7-30. {In Persian}
[54] Mohammadi, H., & Zibakalam, F. (2019). Neoliberalism and the Rise of “Accountability” in University: A Reflection on the Approach to University as a Quasi-market Institution. Culture strategy, 12(47),127-149. https://doi.org/10.22034/jsfc.2019.103797 {In Persian}
[55] Iman, D. M. T., & Kalateh Sadati, A. (2011). Social responsibility of science; A comparative study between Islam and West. Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities, 17(69), 59-88. {In Persian}
[56] Rahmani Miandahi, G; Nasrabadi Lavasani, Z (2001) University autonomy in the future, Translator: Neferabad, Ali Hassan; IRPHE, 7(2), 65-102. {In Persian}
[57] Foucault, M.(2007) Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France1977—1978, Edited by Michel Senellart. Translated by Graham Burchell, London: Palgrave Macmilla. https://doi.org/10.22439/fs.v0i5.1412
 
 
 
 
 
سیاست علم و فناوری
دوره 16، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 57
اردیبهشت 1402
صفحه 71-86

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار