I06
Knowledge circulation within the social sciences - a global inequality concern? (Paper)

Convenors:
Chandni Basu (Albert Ludwigs University of Freiburg, Germany)
Shahnaz Rouse (Sarah Lawrence College)
Stream:
I: Rethinking development and development research
Location:
G1
Start time:
28 June, 2018 at 14:00
Session slots:
1

Short abstract:

The issue of circulation of knowledge within the Social Sciences brings forth implications of connection and disconnection as intrinsic features of knowledge production. What this entails in terms of relational ontology among Social Science researchers therefore remains to be interrogated.

Long abstract:

The issue of circulation of knowledge within the Social Sciences brings forth implications of connection, disconnection and connectivity as intrinsic features of knowledge production. Within the paradigm of circulation and production of academic knowledge this entails explorations on the idea of 'connection' and 'disconnection', both as metaphor and as concept. This further involves issues of identity and power dynamics among Social Science researchers in terms of their everyday practices and strategies of connections (or disconnection). In this direction, intentions and expectations of Social Science researchers remain important towards their formulation of claims. In this scheme, the role of mediators comes forth to facilitate processes of connections/ disconnections. It foregrounds a relational ontology to explicate conceptions and practices of connections/ disconnections among concerned actors along with paving the way towards newer modes of (re)connections necessary to strive for alternative strategies. This panel attempts to highlight the dynamics of academic knowledge production within the Social Sciences. A global inequality lens facilitates in explicating on issues of power dynamics among Social Science researchers along with foregrounding the structural inequalities impacting their performativity within academic knowledge production. Recognition of the throbbing tension related to universalism further on directs towards the significance of focussing on alternative strategies within academic knowledge production. Does the recognition of global structural inequality in academic knowledge production within the Social Sciences therefore create the need for a methodological revamping? How can connectivity be increased in terms of situated knowledge production within the relational dynamics of the global and the local?