Bureaucratic and Market Sources of Epistemic Authority
In International Relations (IR) scholarship, the epistemic communities’ framework has gained relevance for explaining the roles of experts in the context of transnational global governance. However, IR scholars have criticized the framework for descriptive reasoning. This paper aims to strengthen it...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | ces |
| Published: |
Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Philosophy
2022-12-01
|
| Series: | Teorie vědy |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://teorievedy.flu.cas.cz/index.php/tv/article/view/549 |
| Summary: | In International Relations (IR) scholarship, the epistemic communities’ framework has gained relevance for explaining the roles of experts in the context of transnational global governance. However, IR scholars have criticized the framework for descriptive reasoning. This paper aims to strengthen its explanatory power by following rules of a systematic literature review and by using Desmond’s conception of professionalism to further develop Cross’s model of epistemic community. Desmond introduced his concept of professionalism as a response to bureaucratic and market trends in scientific research and Cross developed her concept of professionalism as a comprehensive reconceptualization of Haas’s original model of an epistemic community. The results confirm compatibility between the two concepts. Following the structure of Cross’s model of professionalism, individual autonomy operationalizes selection and training, collective autonomy covers the face-to-face meetings, and the service provision operationalizes the common culture. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1210-0250 1804-6347 |