H – Knowledge production

Politics and practices of co-production of social knowledge

Event Details

  • Date

    Sunday, 28 June - 9:00 – 11:00

  • Venue
    tba
  • Theme
    H – Knowledge production
Convenor
  • Anne Kwaschik (University of Konstanz)
Chair
  • Anne Kwaschik (University of Konstanz)
Panelists
  • Schirin Amir-Moazami (Freie Universität Berlin, Institut für Islamwissenschaft)
  • Thomas Kirsch (University of Konstanz)
  • Corinna R. Unger (European University Institute, Florence)
  • Katja Naumann (Wissenschafts Campus EEGA)

Papers

  • Schirin Amir-Moazami
    The Cunning of Integration: Notes on the 'Muslim Question' in Europe

    The Cunning of Integration: Notes on the 'Muslim Question' in Europe

    Throughout the last decades European immigration societies have discovered "integration" as the key paradigm to deal with the rising religious and cultural plurality. Both in political discourse and in academia integration is conventionally understood as an antidote to intercultural or interreligious strife, as a counter-strategy to marginalisation and exclusion and hence as inevitable. For a few exceptions (Schinkel 2017; Hess et al. 2014; Castro Verela 2012) the political rationalities, functions as much as the legacies of integration have rarely been questioned. My paper critically addresses this celebratory conquest of integration as an answer to multicultural questions. My starting point is the excessive focus on Muslims (or people marked as such) as the central subjects of integration programs and discourses throughout Europe. More specifically, I show how assimilationary projects of the 19th century are both inscribed and concealed in contemporary politics of integration. Pertaining to the key questions raised in this panel, I argue that the co-production of social knowledge by minoritized populations in this case has rather nurtured than remedied the cunning of integration in European nation state.
  • Thomas Kirsch
    Security and the Politics of Partial Knowledge

    Security and the Politics of Partial Knowledge

    The paper explores the politics of knowledge among agencies engaged in the provision of crime prevention in present-day South Africa, especially the private security industry. It shows that many of these agencies are entangled in transnationally circulating forms of security expertise but also draw on militarized traditions stemming from the Apartheid era. I suggest that knowledge production in this field is ‘partial’ in two senses of the word: fragmentary and politically positioned in the one way or the other. While also examining attempts to deal with this challenge through knowledge co-production, such as with local police forces, the paper argues that the fragmentary nature of security knowledge becomes instrumentalized for the profit-oriented production of an ontological insecurity on the part of local populations.
  • Corinna R. Unger
    Europeanizing Knowledge: The Case of the European Science Foundation

    Europeanizing Knowledge: The Case of the European Science Foundation

    In 1974, several European science organizations established the European Science Foundation (ESF) with the goal of increasing scientific cooperation in Europe and establishing European research standards. In doing so, they reacted to an initiative by Altiero Spinelli, the European Community’s Commissioner for Industrial Policy and Research, who had lobbied for a joint European science policy in the face of accelerating economic globalization and the perceived standstill of the European integration process. This paper studies the ways in which the different actors involved framed their expectations towards the ‘Europeanization’ of scientific knowledge production and the challenges they encountered in the process.
  • Katja Naumann
    The Debates about ‘Indigenous’ Knowledge in the UNESCO-Programme for International Social Science Research

    The Debates about ‘Indigenous’ Knowledge in the UNESCO-Programme for International Social Science Research

    From its establishment UNESCO engaged in the international development of social science research by working towards a global infrastructure for national, regional and international cooperation. Following the wave of decolonialization in the 1950-60s several regional research councils in the Global South were set up, which became arenas for the growing demands for indigenous social sciences based on the postcolonial critique. In the UNESCO-led and Paris-based international bodies of the field, the quest for decolonizing the social sciences was met in ambivalent ways. The paper discusses the tensions between the ideal of a globally co-produced social theory and the realities of the dominant occidental-centric knowledge order and its divides.

Abstract

Since the 19th century entanglements and dependencies between people and societies from different regions of the world increased rapidly, and these processes, go along with social tensions, conflict and the production of difference. In periods of increasing worldwide entanglements social knowledge is key for the transformation and re-negotiation of global hierarchies and established separations in general and in the field of knowledge production in detail. It seems clear, that politics and practices of co-production are needed integrating different traditions and tools that societies have developed for self-observation and engineering; it requires spaces and institutions of joint studies on social organization and cohesion that bring together various experiences from different parts of the world or different communities. Taking the coproductionist view as a starting point we expect these moments of co-production to occur along certain well documented pathways, namely, making identities, making institutions, making discourses and making representations. (Jasanoff 2004) However, we address coproduction rather as a way of dealing with complex phenomena of interconnectivity than a concept or idiom such as in STS studies addressing the interplay between scientific practises and culture/politics. Instead, we aim at exploring situations and actors who are involved in the meeting and confrontation of different bodies of knowledge. In this panel we want to engage with these questions by taking a closer look at the politics and practices of making and unmaking ignorance, separation und hierarchization in the production of social knowledge. With examples from different fields of knowledge production we will inquire as well blocking elements. The aim of the panel is to merge internalist approaches to the history of co-produced knowledge with externalist approaches focusing on forms of institutionalization.