What future for the European social sciences and humanities?1

1. The data referred to in this article are the results of two ongoing European research projects: the SSSH-FUTURES project, Social Sciences and Humanities for Europe; and the PLATON + project, The Role of Socio-Economic Science and the Humanities in European Funding Strategy. The authors wish to thank all the partners in these two consortiums for their valuable input. Among the many colleagues who have helped to develop the ideas in this article, the authors especially wish to thank Ekkehard Mochmann and Nico Stehr for their help in elaborating and operationalizing some of the theoretical concepts. Suggestions by Ian Mansfield have contributed to the clarity of the manuscript.

Abstract

This article aims to contribute to the literature on sociology of the social sciences, or, in a broader context, to the sociology of knowledge in the tradition of Karl Mannheim. Its main argument is that the future of the social sciences and the humanities depends on two interrelated dimensions: the development of the disciplinary state of the art and openness towards other disciplines, stakeholders and the society at large. Social sciences and the humanities have an important mission in the formation of the knowledge economy and society and evidence-based politics. However, there are discrepancies between the potential importance of social science knowledge and the comparatively low attention they receive from politics, other research communities and the public as a whole. How can the social sciences and the humanities better address the needs of society? This is the key question that will decide their future.

Keywords:

• social science
• humanities
• European Research Area
• research policy

Notes

1. The data referred to in this article are the results of two ongoing European research projects: the SSSH-FUTURES project, Social Sciences and Humanities for Europe; and the PLATON + project, The Role of Socio-Economic Science and the Humanities in European Funding Strategy. The authors wish to thank all the partners in these two consortiums for their valuable input. Among the many colleagues who have helped to develop the ideas in this article, the authors especially wish to thank Ekkehard Mochmann and Nico Stehr for their help in elaborating and operationalizing some of the theoretical concepts. Suggestions by Ian Mansfield have contributed to the clarity of the manuscript.

2. SSSH-FUTURES project: Social Sciences and Humanities for Europe (ongoing).

3. The Interdisciplinary Centre for Comparative Research in the Social Sciences, Austria (Coordinator); The International Social Science Council, France; Le Centre Interdisciplinaire pour la Recherche Comparative en Sciences Sociales, France; Karl-Mannheim-Chair for Cultural Studies, Zeppelin University Friedrichshafen, Germany; GESIS, Germany; Foundation for European Scientific Cooperation, the venture of the Polish Academy of Sciences and Foundation for Polish Science; Department of Humanities, University of Gothenburg, Sweden; Interdisciplinary Center for Technological Analysis and Forecasting, University of Tel-Aviv, Israel; United Nations University, Comparative Regional Integration Studies, Bruges, Belgium; James Martin Institute for Science and Civilization, Said Business School, Oxford University, UK; Economic and Social Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

4. The partners came from Austria, France, the Netherlands, the UK, Germany, Poland and Israel.

5. INNOCULT project: Internationalization of Research: Institutional Innovation, Culture and Agency in the Framework of Competition and Cooperation.

6. INNOCULT project: Internationalization of Research: Institutional Innovation, Culture and Agency in the Framework of Competition and Cooperation.

7. PLATON+ project: The Role of Socio-Economic Science and the Humanities in European Funding Strategy (ongoing).

8. See the analyses of the work programs and the European research strategy conducted within the framework of the PLATON+ project: The Role of Socio-Economic Science and the Humanities in European Funding Strategy.

9. Priority 1: Life Sciences, Genomics and Biotechnology for Health (HEALTH) (11 responses); Priority 2: Information Society Technologies (IST) (61 responses); Priority 5: Food Quality and Safety (FOOD) (90 responses); Priority 6: Sustainable Development, Global Change and Ecosystems (SUSTDEV) (40 responses); Priority 8: New and Emerging Science and Technologies (NEST) (46 responses); and Scientific Support to Policies (SSP) (70 responses)

10. Priority 8 of FP6. This priority is not continued in the Seventh Framework Programme.

11. Here, the sample is limited because it just comprises projects in which social scientists have participated, without counting those headed by social scientists.

12. This information has been gained by sampling projects for the studies at hand and has recently been confirmed by yet another project. Using the Cordis database that contains the link to the project websites, it can frequently be seen that the website mentioned no longer exists.

13. This article merely deals with the social sciences and humanities. The situation is quite different as far as the natural sciences and technology development are concerned.

14. It has to be noted here that the late recognition of the importance of research funding by mere scientific criteria is not related to a lack of understanding by the European Commission, but to the history of European research funding. Until recently, the Commission was only allowed to finance “pre-competitive RTD” due to the subsidiarity principle, leaving merely scientific research funding to the member states.