40 2010 04 18 15 04 40 FacingAnUnequalWorld.v1

FACING AN UNEQUAL WORLD :
CHALLENGES FOR A GLOBAL SOCIOLOGY

FACING AN UNEQUAL WORLD :
VOLUME ONE: INTRODUCTION, LATIN AMERICA AND AFRICA

Editors: Michael Burawoy, Mau-kuei Chang, and Michelle Fei-yu Hsieh
Associate Editors: Abigail Andrews, Emine Fidan Elcioglu, and Laura K. Nelson
A Joint Publication of The

Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica
Council of National Associations of the International Sociological Association
Academia Sinica
Facing an Unequal World: Challenges for a Global Sociology
These Conference Proceedings are jointly published by the Institute of Sociology at

Academia Sinica, Council of National Associations of the International Sociological
Association, and Academia Sinica.
Published in 2010
Printed in Taiwan
Copyright for the individual papers belongs to the authors.
All rights reserved. Reproduction of materials in this book in any form requires prior
written consent from the authors and full attribution. No part of this book may be
reproduced for commercial purposes.
Please direct inquiries to:
Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica

128 Sec. 2, Academia Rd., Nankang, Taipei 11529, Taiwan
Phone: +886 2 2652-5100 Fax: +886 2 2652-5050
email: [email protected]
http://www.ios.sinica.edu.tw/ios/indexE.php
ISBN- 978-986-02-2692-8
FACING AN UNEQUAL WORLD:
Editors: Michael Burawoy, Mau-kuei Chang, and Michelle Fei-yu Hsieh
Associate Editors: Abigail Andrews, Emine Fidan Elcioglu, and Laura K. Nelson
CONTENTS
VOLUME ONE: INTRODUCTION,

LATIN AMERICA AND AFRICA
Preface ix
Acknowledgements from the Local Organizers xiii

PART I: INTRODUCTION
1.Facing an Unequal World: Challenges for a Global Sociology 3

Michael Burawoy, University of California, Berkeley, USA
2.Challenges Facing Human Society in the 21st Century 28

Yuan-Tseh Lee, Academia Sinica, Taiwan
3.Sociology in Times of Crisis 35

Michel Wieviorka, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales,
Paris, France
4.The Imperative and the Challenge of Diversity: Reconstructing 48

Sociological Traditions in an Unequal World
Sujata Patel, University of Hyderabad, India
PART II: LATIN AMERICA
5.Revitalizing the Sociological View in Latin America 63

Marcos Supervielle, Universidad de la República Oriental del
Uruguay, Uruguay
vi Contents
6.On the Internationalization of Brazilian Academic Sociology 84

Tom Dwyer, State University of Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
7.The Dialogue between Criminology and the South’s Sociology of 105

Violence: The Policing Crisis and Alternatives
José-Vicente Tavares dos Santos, Federal University of Rio Grande do
Sul, Brazil
8.Challenges for and Practices in the Sociology of Work in Mexico: 126

Between Global Paradigms and Local Development Paradigms
Jorge Carrillo, El Colegio de la Frontera Norte (COLEF), Mexico
9.Publishing Sociological Journals in Argentina: Problems and 157

Challenges
Alicia Itatí Palermo, Council of Professional Sociologists, Argentina
10.Sociology, Technology Parks, Applied Research, and International 166

Accreditation
Napoleon Velástegui Bahamonde, University of Guayaquil, Ecuador
PART III: AFRICA
11.Practical Responses to the Challenges for Sociology in the Face of 181

Global Inequality
Layi Erinosho, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Nigeria
12.Social Sciences in Egypt: The Swinging Pendulum between 187

Commodification and Criminalization
Mona Abaza, American University in Cairo, Egypt
13.South African Sociology: Current Challenges and Future Implications: 213

A Review and Some Empirical Evidence from the 2007 National
Survey of Sociology Departments
Mokong Simon Mapadimeng, University of Johannesburg,
Johannesburg, South Africa
Contents vii
14.Resistance to Rating: Resource Allocation, Academic Freedom and 224

Citizenship
Tina Uys, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa
15.Poverty Fighters in Academia: The Subversion of the Notion of Socially 245

Engaged Science in the Mozambican Higher Education System
Patrício Langa, Eduardo Mondlane University, Mozambique and
University of Cape Town, South Africa
16.Challenges of Doing Sociology in a Globalizing South: Between 268

Indigenization and Emergent Structures
Ifeanyi P. Onyeonoru, University of Ibadan, Nigeria
17.Globalization, Sociological Research, and Public Policy in Nigeria: 282

A Critical Analysis of the Relevance of Socio-Legal Research to the
Development Needs of Nigeria
Abdul-Mumin Sa’ad, University of Maiduguri, Nigeria
18.The Relevance of Sociological Studies and Training for Social 300

Realities, Development Policy, and Practice in Ethiopia
Feleke Tadele, Ethiopian Society of Sociologists, Social Workers, and
Anthropologists, Ethiopia
Preface
Preface
The papers included in these three volumes were originally presented at a
conference of National (Sociological) Associations. It was sponsored by
the National Association Liaison Committee of the International Socio-
logical Association and hosted by the Taiwanese Sociological Associa-
tion and the Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica. The conference
took place March 23-25, 2009 in Taipei on the premises of Academia
Sinica, one of the leading centers for scientific research in Asia.
The theme of the conference was “Facing an Unequal World: Chal-
lenges for a Global Sociology.” It was designed to address the obstacles
to forging a global community of sociologists, obstacles that included
inequalities, dominations and dependencies within nations as well as be-
tween nations. We were also concerned to plot new directions for sociol-
ogy that might address those obstacles and meet the challenge of a global
sociology. We have arranged the conference papers into three volumes,
divided according to region: Latin America, Africa, Western Asia, Asia-
Pacific, West-North-South Europe, and East-Central Europe. The idea
was to revisit the 10 conferences of regional sociologies organized by
Immanuel Wallerstein, then President of the ISA, and published as part of
the 1998 World Congress of Sociology. 1
The region is not simply a convenient grouping of nations but impor-
tant in its own right since the challenges facing sociologists crystallize
around a region’s shared history and common geopolitics. Moreover, the
region is the natural stepping stone from the national to the global level,
especially important for the many countries with a weakly developed so-
ciology. Of course, there are also risks involved as defining a region is
itself a political act and, thus, always controversial. There is nothing per-
manent or irrevocable about the groupings we have chosen. They are the
outcome of a negotiated process.
There are obvious lacunae such as the absence of any official repre-
sentatives from North America – the US representative had to withdraw
and Canada did not send a representative. Nevertheless, there were two
participants from the U.S. -- myself and Jan Marie Fritz -- and quite a
1
The 10 regions were: Arab World, East Asia, East-Central Europe, Latin Amer-
ica, Lusophone World, Nordic Europe, North America, South Asia, Southern
Africa, Southern Europe.
x Preface
number of the participants were either trained in North America or had

spent extended periods there. It is the nature of our unequal world, in so-
ciology and beyond, that North America is always present.
The opening address was given by the former President of Academia
Sinica and Nobel Prize Winner for Chemistry, Yuan-Tseh Lee, on the
challenges to human society posed by environmental and climate change.
It was followed by two keynote addresses from President of the ISA, Mi-
chel Wieviorka, and former ISA Vice-President for National Associations,
Sujata Patel. They were followed by 2 streams of 6 panels each, stretch-
ing over 3 days, plus a panel devoted to Taiwanese sociology. The panels
included the following topics: New Approaches to Policy Research, Fac-
ing Northern Hegemonies, Facing Political Pressures, Beyond Universal-
ism and Particularism, The Dilemmas Posed by International Ratings,
Confronting Historical Legacies, Pressure for Policy Research, Doing
Sociology in an Unequal World, Neoliberalism and the Academy, Forg-
ing Alternative Sociologies, Challenges of Regionalism, Transnational
Collaborations. The closing panel included reflections on the conference
from two ISA Vice-Presidents in attendance, Jan Marie Fritz, Devorah
Kalekin-Fishman and Arturo Rodriguez Morato, and the President of the
African Sociological Association, Layi Erinosho.
In the final count there were 60 delegates from 43 different countries.
All 57 National Associations, members of the ISA, were invited to send
participants and 29 accepted. The ISA President, the Vice-Presidents and
members of the National Association Liaison Committee contributed a
further 10 participants. Then we invited another 9 sociologists from un-
der-represented areas. In the final count we had 48 papers whose authors
were distributed as follows: 17 from “A” countries, 15 from “B” coun-
tries, and 16 from “C” countries. 2 The conference organization covered
all the expenses (including travel) of the participants from B and C coun-
tries, and the food and lodging in Taipei of participants from A countries.
The ISA contributed 15% of the total cost but the bulk of the funding
(85%) came from Taiwanese sources – the National Science Council, the
Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica, Ministry of Education, and the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Without this funding from Taiwan the con-
ference would have been impossible. The Taiwanese team at Academia
Sinica left no stone unturned to make sure everyone turned up, ensuring
2
These are categories developed by the World Bank to distinguish economies.
They are based on Gross National Income per capita. The ISA uses them to de-
termine differential membership fees.
Preface xi
that the participants who needed visas received them on time as well as
helping participants plan their often complex air travel.
If the organization of the conference became a lesson in global ine-
qualities, the meeting itself was marked by an extraordinary and egalitar-
ian esprit de corps with intense discussions flowing out into the corridors
and into the night to be continued at breakfast. The Taiwanese team
headed by Dr. Maukuei Chang (President of the Taiwanese Sociological
Association and Chair of the Local Organizing Committee) and the ever-
vigilant team-leader Michelle Hsieh, Fellow of the Institute of Sociology,
Academia Sinica, were responsible for looking after every detail – from
lodging to program, from travel to catering, from tourism to sumptuous
banquets, from airport welcome to farewell prizes. They produced a
magnificent conference website that hosted the program, conference pa-
pers, travel instructions, and, following the conference, audio and visual
recordings of each panel as well photographs. Their herculean efforts
paid off in a most successful endeavor of community building across the
globe, precisely meeting the challenges discussed in the panels. To cap-
ture this atmosphere of engagement and collaboration, two students from
the University of California, Berkeley – Annie Lin and Ana Villarreal –
made a short film, based on interviews and film footage from the confer-
ence, entitled “Challenges for a Global Sociology.” The film focuses on
four challenges in particular: barriers of language, unequal material con-
ditions, privatization of research and the search for alternative theories. It
is included in the DVD that comes with these three volumes.
Bringing the papers together and publishing them involved another
stage of international collaboration. We gathered together a team of
Berkeley graduate students – Abigail Andrews, Fidan Elcioglu and Laura
Nelson – who devoted their summer to translating and editing the revised
papers. They entered into extended discussions with the authors to pro-
duce the finished document. Finally, the papers were sent back to Taiwan
where Maukuei Chang and Michelle Hsieh worked on their publication. I
hope these three volumes will initiate a world-wide debate among soci-
ologists as to how we can constitute ourselves as a global community en-
gaged in addressing the pressing issues of our time. Certainly, this pros-
pect was given a powerful boost by the exciting discussions held in
Taipei.
Michael Burawoy, December 19, 2009

Acknowledgements from the
Local Organizers
The actual organization of this conference says much about the various
aspects of global inequalities. The planning involved finding ways to
overcome the hurdles that could possibly occur as a result of these ine-
qualities. They ranged from negotiating travel permits with the Taiwanese
government, which, like other governments, favors some nationals over
others; organizing complex travel arrangements in an era of tightening
border controls; securing funding to ensure the participation of delegates
from under-represented regions; and initiating various creative measures
to encourage genuine dialogues among all participants on an equal foot-
ing. These tasks could not have been accomplished without the help of
the following agencies in Taiwan and their personnel who were involved
in this project. Special thanks go to the National Science Councils of
Taiwan, the Institute of Sociology at Academia Sinica, the Ministry of
Education, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Also special thanks are
due to the conference program chair, Professor Michael Burawoy, who
was very supportive throughout the whole process; his enthusiasm and
energy pushed us forward in this project of forming a truly international
community of sociologists.
One of the conference themes was the inequalities that exist in the
discipline. In this regard, sociology’s knowledge production can be seen
as a reflection of international relations. Taiwanese sociology, like many
other national sociologies, has gained little exposure internationally de-
spite its vitality. The complex process of mapping out the obstacles to
forming a global sociological community involves knowing about each
other and our distinctive national sociologies. A conference with this kind
of diversity meant broadening the horizons of sociological imagination by
bringing the world to Taiwan. Since the development of sociology in
Taiwan has been heavily influenced by the U.S. and other western coun-
tries, the process, then, was to reveal what is indigenous to Taiwanese
sociology as compared to the sociologies from other countries. Thus, in-
cluding and encouraging local participation was a key item on the agenda
when we started planning the conference. The conference would have
been self-defeating had we failed to bridge the local-global linkages when
its theme was to discuss the impacts of inequality and domination on the
sociological knowledge production among and within nations.
xiv Acknowledgements from the Local Organizers
More importantly, learning about other distinctive national sociolo-

gies complements the increasing awareness and commitment to indigeni-
zation within the Taiwanese sociological community, an effort that has
gone hand-in-hand with internationalization. Several efforts worth men-
tioning were made to achieve this goal, although they are not included in
these conference proceedings. A special panel focusing on Taiwanese so-
ciology was included in the conference program. Local universities also
sent out invitations to some conference delegates to make campus visits.
Special thanks go to these invited delegates who kindly agreed to travel
extra miles to meet with Taiwanese faculty members and students. Ex-
cerpts of these meetings, jubilant feedback, and remarks from young so-
ciologists and from local universities are well documented in the news-
letter of the Taiwanese Sociological Association. The post conference
one-day sociological tour of Taipei, which provided a glimpse into the
country’s past and present, put the conference discussion into practice by
illustrating how historical and colonial legacies could spur vitalities of a
national sociology and the dynamism of civil society.
Lastly, in an attempt to overcome the inequality resulting from an
asymmetrical distribution of resources among regions, we made an extra
effort to enhance accessibility by making all the conference materials and
recordings (both audio and video) that could possibly serve as teaching
and learning aids on global sociology available on-line for downloading.
Thanks are due to the delegates who granted us the right to do this. With
the intention to reach a potentially global audience, the decision to pub-
lish the conference proceedings was taken in a post-conference meeting
between us and Professor Burawoy. The international division of labor in
forging a global community was in action again. Special thanks go to the
Council of National Associations of the International Sociological Asso-
ciation, Academia Sinica, and the Institute of Sociology at Academia
Sinica for funding the publication project, and to Ms. Even Liu and Ms.
Rufen Liao for their painstaking efforts in assisting the production of the
proceedings. As a supplement to the hard copy of the conference pro-
ceedings, the on-line version will be available at
http://www.ios.sinica.edu.tw/cna/index.php. All in all, planning this con-
ference was a rewarding and enriching experience for us, the hosts, and
many thanks go to all those who helped it to succeed.
Mau-kuei Chang and Michelle Fei-yu Hsieh, Academia Sinica

PART I:
INTRODUCTION
Facing an Unequal World 3
Facing an Unequal World: Challenges for a

Global Sociology1
Michael Burawoy, University of California, Berkeley, USA 2
Yuan-Tseh Lee, former president of Academia Sinica and Nobel Prize

Winner, opened the second conference of the Council of National Asso-
ciations with a call to scientists the world-over to come together and con-
front ever-deepening global problems. Some of the most serious chal-
lenges facing mankind -- climate change, energy crisis, and disease –
stem from processes that transcend national boundaries and social divi-
sions, yet the tools to tackle them are still largely locked within national
boundaries and controlled by powerful, vested interests. The problem, Dr.
Lee insisted, is not so much globalization but its incompleteness. Devel-
oping global communities along with global governance is necessary for
tackling global problems. We can no longer retreat back to an insular lo-
calism, so we must move forward to realize the potentials of a more com-
plete and complex globalization. He posed the challenge to sociology:
how did we respond?
As sociologists we specialize in studying the downside of globaliza-
tion, the obstacles to a globalization that will benefit humanity. We are
experts in the ways inequality and domination present the deepest barriers
to tackling the daunting challenges of our epoch. We postulate conditions
for overcoming such barriers while criticizing false solutions that redis-
tribute rather than diminish the ill-effects incomplete globalization. It is
the presumption of this conference that for sociologists to address the
exclusion and oppression underlying poverty and war, disease and envi-
ronmental degradation on a global scale, our scientific community must
itself first assume a global character ruled by dialogue and accountability
We gathered together in Taipei, therefore, to examine our own discipline
through the bifocal lens of domination and inequality – a risky but neces-
sary project -- so as to create and embrace a global sociology that is equal
to the global tasks we face.
1 I am grateful to Emma Porio for her comments on an earlier version of this

paper.
2 Michael Burawoy is the Vice President for National Associations of the Inter-
national Sociological Association.
4 Michael Burawoy
There is an obvious resistance to focusing on such divisions in our

midst. Thus, the great theorists of inequality and domination, when it
comes to the sociological field itself, revert to proclamations of unity
rather than interrogating the inequalities and dominations that divide us.
Immanuel Wallerstein (1999) proposes the absorption of sociology into a
unified field of historical and social sciences, Ulrich Beck (2004) calls for
a global cosmopolitanism, while Pierre Bourdieu (1989) announces the
formation of an international of intellectuals, pursuing a “corporatism of
the universal.” It is as if all divisions in our midst must spontaneously
evaporate in the face of the world system crisis (Wallerstein), the depth of
global inequalities (Beck), or the havoc wreaked by neoliberalism
(Bourdieu). All differences among us, with respect to how we experience
crisis, inequality and neoliberalism, must somehow be summarily buried
to meet the challenge. Their genuine concern for the fate of humanity
leads these sociologists to normative, if not utopian projects, abandoning
the sociological tools that they have spent a life time sharpening. Pro-
jected from the pinnacles of Western academia these projects, at best,
appear remote from the everyday practice of sociology in most of the
world and, at worst, are deployed as universal arbiters of good practice.
This is not to deny there is a unity that we share as sociologists, but it
is not a unity that can be imposed by fiat. That which binds us together
can only be produced by a laborious elaboration from below, stitching
together commonalities in a complex global mosaic. The building block
of that mosaic is the national sociology, for the nation has always been
sociology’s basic unit of analysis as well as defining the parameters of its
field of action. Such, at any rate, is the argument of this introductory
chapter. We have to construct the bonds of unity through articulating and
interweaving the differences that separate us. Thus, to explore those dif-
ferences in our midst and the divergent interests they foreshadow is not to
discredit others, but to simply recognize that we, like the people we study,
cannot escape the inequalities in which we are embedded, and that it is
only out of confronting these inequalities that common enterprises can
possibly be forged.
Such a reflexive project demands that we subject our own relations
and practices to sociological analysis -- not to discredit their authors but
to move sociology to a higher scientific plane. This introduction, there-
fore, sets out from the obvious inequalities we face within our discipline
and association, before excavating their embeddedness within structures
of domination beyond our discipline. From there I consider how those
dominations, especially the symbolic ones, can be challenged by alterna-
tive sociologies. Finally, I ask how such alternatives can be grounded in
experiences, institutions and movements within local and national con-
texts, so as to knit them together into a global configuration, albeit con-

tingent and precarious. I base my reflections on the papers delivered at
the conference, now revised and assembled in the three volumes that fol-
low, papers that address the obstacles to be overcome, but also point be-
yond those obstacles to different ways of constructing global sociologies
from below.
THE CONTEXT OF INEQUALITY AND DOMINATION
The challenges we face are immediately apparent in our own association.

The International Sociological Association was established in 1947 under
the auspices of UNESCO and, in the beginning, it was almost entirely
dominated by sociologists from Europe and North America. Since then it
has made enormous strides toward broader representation from different
parts of the world. Individual members come from 120 countries while
57 countries are collective members of the ISA. At its last World Con-
gress in South Africa participants came from 104 countries.
The real progress that has been made, however, only accentuates the
negative side of the balance sheet. Thus, membership is still heavily con-
centrated in the rich countries: 68.7% of individual members and 40% of
the collective members are from “A” countries. 3 Leadership is drawn
from rich countries: at present the President and all 5 Vice-Presidents are
from “A” countries. This may be unusual -- in the previous regime only
half were from “A” countries – but equally important 92% of the Presi-
dents of the 53 Research Committees come from “A” countries. Nor is
this surprising if only because sociologists with the resources and time to
build international contacts and influence and, then, to carry out organiza-
tional and administrative tasks are more likely to come from richer coun-
tries with their greater educational endowments, their greater affluence,
and their fewer local and national obligations. The ISA can be a perfectly
fair and neutral field but, situated in the context of global inequality, ine-
quality in representation is the inevitable outcome. Although we can and
must strive for greater equality in our midst, that it exists is not due to
some Western conspiracy.
Ironically, the more successful the ISA has been in broadening its
membership basis, the more we face inequalities within the organization
and the more cognizant we become of those sociologists left outside our
3
A, B, and C countries – with A countries the richest -- are defined by the World
Bank on the basis of per capita Gross National Income. They are used by the ISA
as a sliding scale for membership and conference fees, travel subsidies, etc.
6 Michael Burawoy
organization and beyond our reach. The inequalities within the ISA inevi-
tably reflect and mask far deeper inequalities between countries and, no
less important, within countries. We are deeply enmeshed in global ine-
qualities tied to the unequal distribution of material resources (income,
research funds, teaching obligations, working conditions), social capital
(professional networks, patronage) and cultural capital (educational cre-
dentials, university prestige, language facility, publications). As sociolo-
gists we are especially skilled in discerning such inequalities.
From Academic Dependency to Western Hegemony
Inequalities don’t simply exist, but are produced through relations of

domination conceptualized by Farid Alatas (2006a) as “academic de-
pendency” and “intellectual imperialism.” He sees domination in the
cognitive realm – Eurocentrism, Orientalism, the “Captive Mind” 4 – as
tied to but also legitimating dependency in the institutional realm, that is,
dependency on foreign funds, foreign journals, foreign publishers, foreign
training, and foreign demand for skills.
A number of papers express this dependency as legacies of different
forms of colonization:
• Using Alatas’s framework, Shaikh Mohammed Kais describes
just what academic dependency looks like in the postcolonial
context of Bangladesh – from the difficulties of teaching, do-
ing research, a process of hybridization that leads to the repro-
duction of marginality. When we talk of global sociology we
should not forget the challenges faced by those who are more
or less excluded.
• Ifeanyi Onyeonoru describes the social legacies of colonialism
in Nigeria and of continuing metropolitan domination, that has
been countered by indigenization, engagement with local and
national issues, as well as by connections based on national,
regional and international associations.
• Janusz Mucha describes the history of dependency in Poland,
how that led to the development of an authentic but non-
institutional sociology, you might say a public sociology of the
19th. century, but then institutionalization set in under different
regimes during the 20th. century. So “Polish sociology” in-
4
The theory of the “Captive Mind” was developed by Syed Hussein Alatas to
describe the uncritical and imitative adoption of U.S. and European social sci-
ence in Asia. See, for example, Alatas (1974).
creasingly has become “sociology in Poland,” even more so af-

ter the fall of socialism.
Three other papers lay out the working of Western hegemony in Tur-
key, Australia and Japan, countries where one might not expect it:
• Despite Turkey’s history as empire Aytül Kasapoğlu, Nilay
Çabuk Kaya and Mehmet Ecevit describe the hegemony of
Western sociology, manifested in the application of Western
theory to the local context.
• Similarly, Raewyn Connell presents Australia as a settler
colony in the global periphery, a status that invites sociology’s
unreflexive embrace of metropolitan sociology, what she calls,
following Hountondji, “extravertion”. She shows how being
responsive to local context and history or even to local publics
does not necessarily feed back into an original professional
sociology.
• Japan is manifestly an independent nation within the core,
which prompts Yoshimichi Sato to undertake a subtle analysis
of the hegemony of Western sociology. He asks why Japanese
and Chinese scholars do not develop their concepts (e.g.
aidagara and en, guanxi) into universal ones, to compete with
notions of social capital. Sato suggests it is necessary to go
beyond such thick local concepts, formulated as a reaction to
the inadequacies of social capital, by turning them into thin
concepts that can travel to different places where they can be
relocalized.
Then there are cases in which the hegemony of the West, but
especially of U.S. sociology is tied to geopolitics
• Thus, Sammy Smooha presents Israel as part of the core
actively embracing and participating in US sociology as its
appendage. In his view, the result is that sociologists pay too
little attention to Israeli specificity, which could provide the
basis of an original contribution to world sociology.
• Mau-kuei Chang, Ying-hwa Chang, and Chih-chie Tang from
Taiwan offer a far more complicated picture of the effects of
geopolitics on sociology. They write about the effects of a suc-
cession of external subjugations: first, of Japanese who used
survey methods as an arm of colonial rule, then the sponsor-
ship of sociology by the U.S. in the early years of the National-
ist KMT government, which led to the elevation of the
(mainland) Chinese roots of Taiwanese sociology. When Tai-
wan lost its international status in the early 1970s, displaced by
the People’s Republic of China, sociology took a new turn.
8 Michael Burawoy
Sinicization was replaced by a move toward indigenization as

a reaction to the continuing dependence on the US and the
threat of PRC. The combination of economic growth and geo-
political insecurity led to the institutionalization of sociology,
but also intensified pressure on Taiwanese universities in gen-
eral and sociology in particular to establish their international
ranking, which, in turn, fed indigenization.
While it is customary to condemn the enormous influence the US
wields throughout the world, this should not lead us to overlook other
circuits of North-South hegemony, such as the impressive presence of
French sociology in much of Latin America as well as parts of Asia,
Middle East and Africa. Such competing hegemonies, in this case over
the valuation of different linguistic capital, do give some leverage to the
dominated groups. There are three official languages in the ISA yet
English prevails, not only because of the influence of the Anglo-
American world, but also because so many countries in the global south,
including India, China and much of Africa, have invested in English as a
second language.
National and Regional Hegemonies
Hegemony within world sociology cannot be reduced to a simple North-

South, West-East, developed-underdeveloped, metropolis-periphery
dichotomy. First, there are important gradations in the world system and
we might even invoke Wallerstein’s notion of semi-periphery to capture
distinctive societies that combine within themselves features of both
periphery and core. Thus, countries such as India, Brazil, South Africa,
and China contain within themselves conditions approximating to the
“North” as well as the “South”. Second, there is a center and a periphery
in the production of knowledge within such countries that can be as stark
as the difference between any rich and poor country. The model of
academic dependency shouldn’t lead us to overlook patterns of inequality
and domination within countries.
• Tina Uys reports the criticisms of South African sociologists
toward the rating system of their scholarly ouput, designed to
promote international compertitiveness. First, it presumes
a false consensus on standards. Second, ratings based on
publications in international journals and relying on
international reviewers draws research away from issues and
problems of local and national importance. Third, it devalues
the teaching and training of the next generation of sociologists,
and instead creates an elite statum of researchers. In short, the
rating system effectively internalizes the hegemony of

Northern sociology, thereby deepening the divide among South
African sociologists.
• Emma Porio describes the pressures on Philippine universities,
subject to a range of audits and pressure for policy driven
research with the result that there is increased differentiation
both within and between universities, and this takes place at
the same time as dependency on Northern funding increases.
• From Egypt Mona Abaza tells another story – one in which the
field of sociology is subject to a pincer movement of
commodification and criminalization. Critical voices, even the
seemingly most protected, such as Saad Eddin Ibrahim’s, are
pilloried as subversive, jailed as spies. Public sociology
becomes life threatening in an authoritarian regime with no
autonomous civil sphere. In this case an international
campaign in Ibrahim’s defense easily redounded against him,
and even made him suspect among some of his colleagues.
The semi-periphery not only draws attention to internal divisions
within countries but between countries within regions. Thus, Brazilian
sociology is the best resourced sociology within Latin America, Indian
sociology within South Asia, South African sociology within Africa, just
as the core countries of the European Union have richer traditions of
sociology than its periphery. Inequality, yes, but does this imply
domination? What are the possibilities of collaboration across these
divides?
• Tom Dwyer does not mince words when writing about the
different mechanisms guaranteeing the domination of
metropolitan sociology – from linguistic domination, to the
control of journals and rating systems. Based on the experience
of Brazil he proposes an alternative multi-polar vision of
internationalization – one that emanates from countries of the
South as well as from the North. A vibrant Brazilian sociology
rates its own Portuguese-language journals on an international
ranking system, and has actively pursued South-South
collaboration (and Latin America has long been a leader in this
regard).
From the standpoint of the peripheries of yesterday’s empires things
don’t look rosy, especially when countries are cast to Western wolves
under the spell of socialist legacies.
• Abulfaz Suleymanov describes the difficult situation in Azer-
baijan where the Soviet legacy has left a vacuum in sociologi-
cal training, the underdevelopment of social theory, coloniza-
10 Michael Burawoy
tion of research by Western interests, the reduction of sociol-

ogy to commercially sponsored surveys, and more generally
the subordination of sociology to the market at the cost of pub-
lic concerns. In this context building a national association and
making regional and international connections become espe-
cially important.
• Rastislav Bednárik, writing about Slovakia, reminds us just
how difficult it is for a young and barely recognized discipline,
facing growing numbers of students with very limited teachers
and resources. Slovakia may be in the European Union but its
peripheral situation makes for a dramatically different
conditions of knowledge production when compared to core
countries such as Germany, France or U.K.
• Inga Tomić-Koludrović describes the reaction of Croatian
sociologists to the Bologna Process, integrating higher
education in the European Union. She sees the opposition as a
legacy of the socialist past and rooted in outdated nationalist
sentiments that fail to come to grips with the new global
dispensation – second modernization -- to which the Bologna
process is a response. The Bologna process, she argues, is not
simply an arbitrary imposition from above but is responsive to
needs from below, from groups, identities and interests that
have been marginalized.
While not denying an overwhelming concentration of institutional
resources and symbolic domination, emanating from the North,
reinforced by the circulation through the North of a few privileged
scholars from the South, nonetheless a simple North-South division, let
alone a notion of US imperialism, does not capture the complex
articulation of hegemonies of very different types within as well as
among nation states.
The Neoliberal Crisis
Academic dependency across nations is itself being reconfigured as the

position of sociology and more broadly of the university is challenged
within the core. Sociology has become more precarious in Britain,
Germany, and France as the golden years of sociology recede into the
past and as the discipline has been threatened by neoliberal regimes
which question the very idea of the social.
• Louis Chauvel offers a chilling analysis of the decline of the
salaried middle class in France since the 1970s. This class in-
cludes sociologists who find their positions under assault as the
value of the sociology credential falls relative to other creden-

tials, such as economics, exacerbated by the decline in funding
for the public university relative to the Grandes Écoles.
• Marina Subirats warns of the dangers of disciplinary fracturing.
She is precisely critical of sociology for not emulating the
unity of economics. Reflecting on the experience of Spanish
sociology, she proposes a “global sociology” that recognizes
increased global interdependence, transcending national
parochialism and disciplinary fragmentation, and facing the
real problems of a world in crisis.
Michel Wieviorka directly addresses the crisis of our times by
accusing economists of misunderstanding its true character. The crisis
does not have a simple teleology -- crisis-resolution-crisis, down-turn
followed by the inevitable upturn. Such a cyclical account cannot
comprehend what is qualitatively new because what is new is produced
by collective actors, especially social movements, whose retreat in the
first place was responsible for initiating the crisis three decades ago. The
way out of the present crisis, Wieviorka avers, is through the birth of new
actors, such as the anti-globalization movement, or the rebirth of old
actors, such as the trade union movement. What he does not consider,
however, is the possibility of sociologists becoming a global actor in their
own right, simultaneously participant in and observer of the world they
study. The chapters in the three volumes explore precisely this possibility,
but it is a possibility that rests upon negotiating our internal differences.
FROM DIVERSE TRADITIONS TO

ALTERNATIVE SOCIOLOGIES
Farid Alatas argues that, in the short run, there is little we can do about
the material side of academic dependency, and we should concentrate,
therefore, on the side of ideas and theory. How can we combat
Eurocentrism, Orientalism, and the “Captive Mind”? Challenging the
universalism of Western sociologies is a two-step project: first, to show
that they do not reflect the experience of subjugated populations and then,
to demonstrate that there are alternative theories that have been ignored
or suppressed by metropolitan sociology.
Diverse Traditions
The ISA has long recognized the existence of multiple sociological tradi-
tions, signaled by a number of books. The first collection, National Tra-
12 Michael Burawoy
ditions in Sociology, edited by Nikolai Genov (1989), emerged from the

11th. World Congress held in Delhi in 1986. A second volume edited by
Martin Albrow and Elizabeth King (1990), Globalization, Knowledge
and Society, was a collection of papers that appeared in the ISA journal
International Sociology since its founding in 1986. It was during this pe-
riod that the Nigerian, Akinsolo Akiwowo (1986), made his famous in-
tervention on behalf of “indigenous” sociology. In response to these de-
bates Martin Albrow optimistically claimed that sociology goes through a
series of stages: universalism, national sociologies, internationalism, in-
digenization and finally globalization. Most recently Sujata Patel (2009)
has brought out The ISA Handbook of Diverse Sociological Traditions,
showing how sociological traditions can be broadly grouped into regions
that have shared common historical experiences. The recognition of mul-
tiple sociologies is already a challenge to the idea of a single science that
universalizes the experiences and thoughts of the most advanced capital-
ist countries.
• Sujata Patel’s keynote address develops this theme, challeng-
ing those who would abandon national formations and their
sociologies, sensitive to the relation of sociology and power at
global as well as national levels, and defending the necessity of
developing multiple sociological traditions in conversation
with one another.
A long line of Presidents of the ISA have emphatically supported the
plurality of sociologies, even if they still searched for an underlying or
projected unity. Ulf Himmelstrand (1978-1982) made a point of opening
dialogue with sociologists from Soviet Union and Eastern Europe as well
as with Africa and Latin America. Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1982-
1986) wrote in his foreword to the first issue of International Sociology:
“This will be the endeavor of our journal: to increase our knowledge
about contemporary societies and sociologies, by showing pluralistic
paths of concern in sociology rooted in different historical and cultural
traditions” (1986: 2). Margaret Archer (1986-1990) proposed to develop
a unified sociology but one based on diversity, and Piotr Sztompka
(2002-2006), similarly called for a uniformity of world sociology com-
bined with uniqueness of local sociologies.
T.K. Oomen (1990-1994), however, was far more cautious about any
proposed unity, concerned that internationalization could be a proxy for
Westernization. Too hasty an internationalization without protection for
weaker sociological traditions could lead to intellectual colonialism. He
called for “multidirectional flow of sociology, particularly strengthening
the flow from the weak to the strong centers” (Oomen, 1991: 81). The
only President to come from a recently decolonized society, he was the

most forthright about the hegemony of Western sociology.
Perhaps the ISA President to have done most for the development of
regional sociologies, despite his unitary vision of sociology, was Imman-
uel Wallerstein (1994-1998). He orchestrated regional conferences that
led to the publication of 10 edited volumes, one for each region’s sociol-
ogy. His was a major step toward recognizing the diversity of traditions,
and gave birth to a new generation of international sociologists. Alberto
Martinelli (1998-2002) followed Wallerstein with another important insti-
tutional innovation that brought together young sociologists from all over
the globe -- the annual PhD Laboratory. In short, President after President
has defended the plurality of coexisting sociologies, even if they have
been less willing to tackle their arrangement in a hierarchical order.
Southern Theory
A more radical project thematizes the relations among these diverse tradi-
tions as one of domination, and proceeds to challenge that domination by
valorizing what Raewyn Connell and others call Southern Theory. In
Southern Theory (2007) Connell problematizes the canonical works of
metropolitan theory – from the so-called classics of Marx, Weber, and
Durkheim to the contemporary theories of James Coleman, Pierre
Bourdieu and Anthony Giddens – whose silence on the South portends a
distinctively Northern perspective disguised as universalism. Connell
presents us with an alternative project that foregrounds social thinkers
from the South who have not made it into the “mainstream” – from Af-
rica the Dahomeyan philosopher Paulin Hountontdji, from the Middle
East, three Iranian thinkers al-Afghani, Al-e Ahmad, and the more con-
temporary Shariati, from Latin America the Argentinian economist Raúl
Prebisch, the Brazilian sociologist Fernando Enrique Cardoso, the Mexi-
can anthropologist García Canclini, from South Asia subaltern thinker,
Ranajit Guha, anthropologist Veena Das, and public intellectual Ashis
Nandy, and from South Africa, an early African nationalist and gifted
public intellectual, Sol Plaatje. Around such thinkers Connell proposes to
build an alternative social science. In seeking out alternative traditions,
theories or discourses that challenge the assumptions of mainstream U.S.
and European sociology, she raises a number of intriguing questions.
First, is it significant that the thinkers Connell dismisses are all soci-
ologists from the North whereas those she embraces are a motley group
of thinkers of whom none are declared sociologists, with the exception of
Cardoso, who after all was deeply influenced by French sociology. Is so-
ciology, then, only a (Northern) metropolitan project? No less problem-
14 Michael Burawoy
atic is the fact that so many of Connell’s Southern Theorists, e.g. Cardoso,
Plaatje, Prebish, and Shariati, are thoroughly infused with Northern
(French, English, and U.S.) thinking. If there is a Southern sociology
then what makes it Southern and what makes it sociology?
Second, can one dismiss “Northern” theory when it includes the cri-
tique of the very theorists Connell takes as representative of Northern
sociology. Feminism, critical race theory and even Marxism have relent-
lessly attacked the economism of James Coleman, the functionalism of
Pierre Bourdieu and the third way of Anthony Giddens. Does that make
these Northern critical theories part of Southern theory? Are there not, at
least, two hegemonies: an hegemony within dominant countries/regions
and a hegemony exercised by those dominant countries/regions over the
subaltern countries/regions? Does that not open up the possibility of alli-
ances struck between subjugated sociologies of the North and “Southern
Theory”?
Therefore, third, rather than homogenizing metropolitan sociology,
can we not see it as a contested field with dominant and subordinate mo-
ments. Doesn’t this also apply to the South? Connell’s chosen Southern
theorists have to be restored to their context. Once we place Plaatje, Car-
doso and Prebisch, for example, in their own intellectual fields, we will
see how they reflect, refract and represent particular interests in their
countries of origin. Thus, are there not hegemonic and subordinate soci-
ologies within the South? Can one understand the thinkers to which
Connell draws our attention without locating them in their national
fields – intellectual and political?
• Mohammad Ghaneirad shows how and why Shariati’s com-
plex hybrid of Islamic and Western thinking has dropped out
of the present day Iranian sociological field. The state initiated
drive for an Islamic sociology or a sociology that would pro-
mote the Islamicization of society has provoked a phobia of
Nativism among professional sociologists concerned to defend
their autonomy. Alternative sociologies are difficult to develop
in this complex situation. There is a plurality of responses --
from the embrace of universalistic sociologies, inspired by
Western concepts, to seeking new directions in public sociolo-
gies. But Shariati’s ideas are shunned from both sides of the
divide.
Finally, and relatedly, if Southern theory exists to express, albeit in
complex and mediated form, the experience of the South, then what is
this experience of the South? How is that experience expressed in theory?
If the experience of the South is multiple, what distinguishes the South
from the North? How come Australia ends up in the “South”? If South-
ern theory is not embedded in some material experience, nor reflective of

some real interests, how can we expect social science to emerge from
Connell’s Southern theorists?
• Farid Alatas has pursued a similar project but rather than dis-
missing Western theory he proposes different ways of amal-
gamating Western sociology with alternative intellectual tradi-
tions emanating from non-Western societies. In his contribu-
tion here he dwells on the history of a distinctive Chinese soci-
ology and its relevance to the modern world. Elsewhere
(2006b) he has creatively introduced Ibn Khaldun’s cyclical
theory of history into Western debates about Asiatic society.
In constituting her North/South binary Connell has raised a host of
problems – problems that we can no longer side step. Together with
Alatas she has fired the all-important opening shot, inverting the taken-
for-granted hierarchy that all new ideas in sociology come from the North.
They inspire us to think outside conventional sociological frames. We
owe them both a great debt for making the project of alternative sociolo-
gies imaginable, now we must make it feasible.
BUILDING NATIONAL SOCIOLOGIES
We must come down from heaven to earth, we must ground any alterna-
tive theories in the living practices and concrete social relations of actu-
ally existing sociologists. If they are to spark the sociological imagination
they must be rooted in the division of sociological labor, defined by its
four elements – professional, policy, public and critical sociology.
At the core of this division of labor is professional sociology that de-
velops scientific research programs and is accountable to peers. Whether
we are living in Colombo or Paris, Aukland or Oakland, Johannesburg or
Sao Paulo, Tokyo or Beirut what defines us as sociologists is our connec-
tion to traditions of sociological research and theorizing, traditions that
have been defined by our predecessors, traditions that are being continu-
ally redefined and rearticulated in a community of fellow scholars. To be
sure professional sociology can be overdeveloped here and underdevel-
oped there, but it still lies at the core of our discipline.
It is important, therefore, that professional sociology does not come to
be monopolized – and the danger is ever-present -- by universities and
research institutes in the North. National professional sociologies cannot,
however, spring from nowhere. They must be responsive to and inspired
by problems defined by local or national actors. This is what I call a pol-
icy sociology which is borne of but also feeds back into professional so-
16 Michael Burawoy
ciology. Whether we are talking of surveys or case studies, policy sociol-

ogy should retain an intimate connection to professional sociology. If it
does not maintain that connection it is easily captured by the clients it
serves. There is, however, a second way of being connected to the local
and national context, and that is through public sociology. Here the point
is not to solve a problem defined by a client but to generate discussion
and debate about the basic values and direction of society. You might
say public sociology is the conscience of policy sociology in that it often
debates issues of policy and influences the direction of policy.
If professional sociology is the core of our discipline critical sociol-
ogy, the fourth element, is the heart of sociology. Critical sociology is
first and foremost the critique of professional sociology. Here, indeed, we
find the agenda for alternative sociologies – a critique of the theoretical
foundations of much professional sociology. Critical sociology interro-
gates the assumptions made by policy sociology, just as it infuses new
visions into public sociology. Critical sociology involves sociologists in
conversation with one another as to the foundations of their common en-
terprise.
The assumption behind this model of knowledge production is that a
flourishing discipline depends on the interaction among all four types of
knowledge, on preventing the introversion of professional and critical
sociologies or the extroversion of policy and public sociologies. The suc-
cess of our conference lay precisely in the manifold ways these four types
of sociology entered into a common discourse. Let me elaborate.
Public Sociology
Whether one is struggling for the rearticulation of sociologies within the
existing global hegemony or one is seeking a new hegemonic order re-
volving around Southern Theory, new directions can only take root if
grounded in real experience, in institutional life, and even in social
movements. This requires a sociology that makes itself relevant to local
or national issues, and accountable to local or national publics. The un-
dertaking of such a public sociology should, therefore, be valorized by a
national sociological community as a way to develop shared perspectives
and deflate the universalistic claims of metropolitan sociology.
Public sociology is dialogue between sociologists and publics – a dia-
logue that recognizes the autonomy and reciprocal interdependence of
each side. It can work in two ways: either through an organic connection
of sociologists with a community, organization or movement, or alterna-
tively through addressing a far broader audience, and cultivating national
debate, what I call traditional public sociology. Organic public sociology
would include Alain Touraine’s action sociology, deepening the con-

sciousness of social movement militants and Paulo Freire’s pedagogy of
the oppressed working through an interaction between sociologist and
peasantry. Traditional public sociology would include the writings of Pi-
erre Bourdieu in France, M.N. Srinivas in India or Shariati in pre-
revolutionary Iran. They all contributed to national debate about pressing
social issues.
A number of papers in these volumes provide examples of public so-
ciology from the past as well as the present.
• Dénes Némedi presents the history of Hungarian sociology as
a complex interlacing of internal and external influences start-
ing with original versions of traditional and then organic public
sociology in the 19th and early 20th centuries, superseded by
Soviet Marxism that generated its own critical sociology be-
fore the embrace of a Western oriented professional sociology.
• Georgy Fotev describes the dilemmas of traditional public so-
ciology in Bulgaria battling with the communist legacy of a
dependent and policy-oriented sociology. There are risks on all
sides: threats to value free professional sociology, dangers of
populism but also distanciation, and ambiguous relations with
the media.
• With Indonesia as their case Rochman Achwan and Iwan
Sujatmiko show what can be done when there is synergy
between “sociology for society” and “society for sociology”
(between professional-critical and public-policy sociologies).
They point to the involvement of public sociology in the
reform of governance and labor laws, economic empowerment,
agrarian reform, and constitutional amendment.
• Luis Baptista and Paulo Machado describe the efflorescence of
sociology in Portugal after the end of the dictatorship in 1974.
There sociology has had a close connection to national politics
and policy science, but never at the cost of a public sociology.
Indeed, the Portuguse Sociological association has organised
open public debates about civic issues in different cities up and
down the country.
Between traditional and organic public sociologies there should not
be a relation of hostility and exclusivity but one of synergy and interac-
tion. Traditional public sociology gives direction to organic public soci-
ologies, connecting them to one another, while organic public sociology
grounds wider public debate in the realities facing different communities.
18 Michael Burawoy
Policy Sociology
In some contexts public sociology faces major obstacles while in other

contexts it is simply a luxury. On the one hand, aspiring traditional public
sociologists may have difficulty accessing the national media, indifferent
or hostile to sociological perspectives. On the other hand, sociologists
may not have the resources to develop the time consuming organic rela-
tion to communities, and communities may not be interested in debate
and discussion. They want sociologists to deliver something much more
concrete. In other words, they want policy rather than public sociology.
In addition, there may be real material pressures impelling sociolo-
gists into the policy realm, where they can garner necessary “extra” in-
come, by serving external agencies that define problems as well as ac-
ceptable solutions. But here too there are different ways for sociologists
to go about their business. On the one hand, there is the sponsorship
model in which the client defines problems -- sometimes broadly, allow-
ing sociologists considerable autonomy to bring critical perspectives to
bear, and sometimes narrowly, serving as a paid expert or survey techni-
cian, often destined to legitimate policies already decided. On the other
hand, there is the advocacy model in which sociologists takes it upon
themselves to make policy proposals, seeking out advocates in the policy
world. The initiative here lies with the sociologist rather than the client.
Advocacy policy sociology can easily bleed into public sociology when
the sociologist drums up support in the wider community.
The following are examples of the advocacy model in which the pol-
icy sociologist formulates the character of the social problem and then
defines appropriate (and inappropriate) responses or even solutions.
• José‐Vicente Tavares‐Dos‐Santos, writing from Brazil,
shows the influence of neoliberal punishment‐centered po‐
licing models within the criminology imported from the
United States. In Porto Alegre he has developed alternative
sociological models that protect citizenship security, on the
basis of closer relations between police and community.
• Napoleón Velástegui Bahamonde from Ecuador, offers a pro-
grammatic statement, insisting that sociology must join the so-
cial and natural sciences in promoting modernization and the
university’s engagement in the knowledge-based society.
• Vu Hao Quang writes of the role of sociology in analyzing so-
cial problems such as the fate of Vietnamese farmers under
policies of the WTO. Here sociology is a technocratic disci-
pline for the purposes of promoting social and economic de-
velopment.
On the other hand, many of the papers describe the dangers of a spon-
sored policy sociology of a narrow contractual character that gives little
autonomy to the researcher. If widespread this approach can have a dis-
torting effect on the general practice of sociology in a given country.
• Abdul Mumin Sa’ad describes the impediments to the sociolo-
gist’s influence over Nigeria’s legal policy making -- narrow
perception of development, prejudices against academics, in-
adequate media access and coverage, no appropriate body for
receiving and utilizing sociological research.
• Patricio Langa describes another aspect of sociology’s limited
significance -- the “instrumentalization” of the Mozambiquan
university whereby the social sciences are relegated below the
more “useful” and technical disciplines. Political interference
in university life, a legacy of the previous socialist regime, ad-
vances neither science nor the national “fight against absolute
poverty.”
• Sari Hanafi describes the proliferation of private research cen-
ters throughout the Arab world, channeling resources away
from and undermining public universities in the region, This
new NGO-based global elite produces shoddy policy-driven
research, competing for funds from foreign donors with their
own political agendas, creating superficial knowledge of the
region, abandoning any critical capacity toward fashionable
paradigms.
European welfare states have always had a strong policy orientation,
combining both advocacy and sponsorship models. These cases from
Denmark and Finland point to the emergence of new arenas of policy sci-
ence, so-called mode-2 type knowledge, that is policy oriented knowl-
edge produced outside the university by inter-disciplinary teams.
• Kristoffer Kropp and Anders Blok also describe shifts toward
policy science (and to some extent “mode-2” type knowledge)
in Denmark, linked to a whole gamut of institutions broadly
connected to the welfare state, leading to what they call “wel-
fare reflexivity.” In the 1990s to the present, strategies of re-
professionalization and policy research rescued Danish sociol-
ogy from the state-led offensives of the 1980s against the radi-
calism of the 1970s.
• Pekka Sulkunen from Finland writes of the growth of “Mode-
2” type transdisciplinary knowledge concerned with applica-
tion and what works, with evaluation research, corresponding
to transformations in welfare states toward programs proposed
from below rather the plans imposed from above.
20 Michael Burawoy
Professional Sociology
The focus on public and/or policy sociology is not intended to reproduce

the existing global division of sociological labor with the metropolitan
monopoly of theoretical work and scientific research, so it is important
that national policy and public sociologies feed into a national profes-
sional sociology. Without that the enterprise would be of diminished
value and significance. Here, too, there are multiple challenges and risks.
Thus, limited resources make it more feasible to simply import profes-
sional sociology from abroad, or where resources are not so limited states
may be intent on bench marking universities to “international,” i.e. met-
ropolitan standards. This is what we might call formal professionalization.
By contrast substantive professionalization involves the development of a
relatively autonomous professional sociology, based on expanding re-
search programs influenced by the issues brought to the table by public
and policy sociologies. We can find examples of this in different conti-
nents, for example, subaltern studies in India, labor studies South Africa,
participatory action research in Latin America, but, note, in each case the
professionalization stems from embeddedness in local or national issues,.
Certainly formal professionalization is one way to bring theories and
methodologies, new paradigms to the attention of national sociologies,
but it should not overwhelm substantive professionalization. Between the
two there should be a reciprocal relation without the one outweighing the
other. Indeed, at their best the Research Committees of the ISA can fos-
ter such a balance, fostering the fruitful circulation of ideas that can ad-
vance the autonomy and energy of national sociologies.
Sustaining a relatively autonomous professional sociology can be
very difficult due to the paucity of resources, the pressure for narrow pol-
icy-driven research and inhospitable national legacies. Below we have
cases from Africa, the Former Soviet Union, Latin America and India that
face very different challenges.
Africa:
• Simon Mapadimeng writes of the complexity of continuities
and breaks with apartheid South Africa. The massive expan-
sion of sociology students and thus ever-increasing teaching
loads, the continuing divide between historically black and
white universities, and the turn to client-driven policy research,
are threatening the advance of research-based and critical soci-
ologies, and South Africa’s place in the global division of so-
ciological labor.
• Feleke Tadele maps out the history of sociology in Ethiopia –
an exceptional African nation without a colonial legacy. It has
experienced rapid growth in the recent period (manifested in

degrees at all levels), owing to the demands for sociologists in
the NGO sector. There is a strong emphasis on the applied di-
mension of sociology at the expense of building research tradi-
tion and indigenous social theory.
The Former Soviet Union:
• Gevorg Poghosyan depicts the dilemmas of Armenia released
from the former Soviet Union as an independent state, strug-
gling to constitute a national sociology de novo in a context of
open borders and free markets. Facing the exodus of sociolo-
gists from the academic world into jobs abroad or private poll-
ing companies, the Armemenian Sociological Association tries
to promote professional sociology through regional, diasporic
and international connections.
• Valery Mansurov offers a more optimistic picture for Russia,
where he sees the convergence of postSoviet and Western so-
ciology. As old restrictions are cast aside, Russian sociology
has developed a multi-paradigmatic studies of elite formation,
the continuing power of the Soviet nomenklatura, gender ine-
quality, poverty and homelessness, conflict as in the Chechen
War, adopting qualitative methodologies within new theoreti-
cal frameworks, including a reconstructed Marxism.
Latin America:
• Alicia Palermo from Argentina takes on one aspect of substan-
tive professionalism, the challenges of sustaining national
journals of sociology that are recognized nationally, regionally
and world-wide. She emphasizes the biases of international rat-
ing systems, as well as the lack of funding and training, and
calls for greater involvement of state agencies and collabora-
tions among sociology journals across Latin America.
• Jorge Carrillo writes about the challenges facing the sociology
of work in Mexico – one of the strongest subdisciplines in
Mexico, and renown throughout Latin America. With tighten-
ing economic resources, there are fewer research projects, and
growing inequalities within the research community. Studies
are more descriptive than theoretical, and miss an international
comparative dimension, although there is a very fruitful col-
laboration across Latin America.
India:
• As Ishwa Modi writes, even a country as large as India with its
large body of sociology, and its long traditions finds the devel-
opment of an autonomous sociology difficult, especially in an
22 Michael Burawoy
era of marketization and privatization. But the Indian Socio-

logical Society has tried to foster greater communication
within India but also between India and other countries, espe-
cially those of the Global South, namely Brazil and South Af-
rica.
Professional sociology is also struggling in richer countries, under
competitive pressures of internationalization.
• Charles Crothers from New Zealand argues that policy and
public sociologies have not borne fruit in a strong professional
sociology. Indeed, in recent years sociology has been absorbed
into other disciplines, leaving only one autonomous sociology
department. Even though this white settler colony is part of
the semi-periphery, it is a periphery of Australia which sets in-
tellectual patterns for the region.
• John Holmwood examines the consequences of the British “re-
search assessment exercise,” that is designed to benchmark
academic knowledge to international standards. He sees this
formal professionalization as a form of “governmentality” that
threatens the professional core and its critical alternatives by
fragmenting sociology, with parts migrating into other disci-
plines.
As all these cases suggest, the development of an autonomous profes-
sional sociology is very much dependent upon the largesse of the state,
and the autonomy of a university system as well as the standing of the
discipline within the university. One of the reasons for the expansion of
Ethiopian sociology has been its ability to make teaching a priority, to
offer degrees or diplomas in “applied” sociology that attract students. On
the other hand, of course, excessive teaching loads can also sink the pos-
sibility of developing serious research agendas. Since teaching absorbs
so much of the time of so many sociologists we have to give serious at-
tention to innovative synergies between teaching and research, especially
as electronic media become more widely dispersed.
Critical Sociology
It is critical sociology that sustains the integrity of the division of socio-

logical labor. It sustains a balance between substantive and formal profes-
sionalization, between sponsored and contract policy research, and be-
tween traditional and organic public sociology. The project of critical
sociology is to make us accountable to ourselves as well as others, and to
build a reflexive community, reflexive about the values we think are im-
portant, values that might be infused into professional, policy and public
sociologies.
Critical sociology may be aimed at our discipline, but it is also a con-
duit of ideas from other disciplines. Again it is especially important to
fend off pressures for narrow disciplinary chauvinism that can mark the
social sciences of the North, especially in the United States. Interdiscipli-
narity is very important where public and policy sociology is emphasized
since neighboring disciplines can offer important perspectives on social
issues, but it is also very important where social science disciplines are
individually very weak. Interdisciplinarity does not mean the dissolution
of disciplinarity. Quite the opposite it feeds off disciplinarity, which is its
sine qua non, just as it often provides intellectual sustenance for discipli-
narity.
Metropolitan sociology developed through the synergy of four types
of knowledge – professional, policy, public and critical – even if now one
or more dominate their disciplinary fields. It’s important to replicate that
synergy, not just within countries but within regions too. Thus, Latin
America, as a region, offers probably one of the best examples of a broad
gauged synergy among the four types of knowledge and has given rise to
one of most vibrant sociological fields in the world.
• Marcos Supervielle, reflecting on the four phases of post-
WWII history of sociology in Latin America, underlines its
continuing engagement with society – whether at the level of
policy experts or public dialogue. It is this engagement that be-
comes the spring board for original sociologies, creatively ap-
propriating and critically appraising metropolitan theories
while generating autonomous research traditions. Making it-
self accountable to local and national communities has been
one ingredient but the creation of a regional community of
scholars has been the second ingredient for the dynamic auto-
centric expansion of theory and research.
• Takashi Machimura describes the very different situation in
Japan where research and teaching has been largely conducted
in Japanese. This has favored a synergy among the four types
of sociology, including a strong public sociology, but commu-
nication with other sociologies is difficult. Although Western
classics are translated into Japanese, Japanese classics rarely
become a reference point for international sociology, despite
Japan being the second or third most numerous concentrations
of sociology in the world.
If one way to resist the false universalism of metropolitan hegemony
is to build robust national sociologies throughout the South, another way
24 Michael Burawoy
is to nationalize or “provincialize” Northern sociology. The universal

claims, implicit or explicit, of U.S., French, German sociologies must be
qualified by recognition of the particular realities they reflect and from
which they have emerged. Here, too, more attention to a public sociology
might help, but also openness to the contestation of universalistic claims
by other national professional and critical sociologies. There is nothing
like open discussion among sociologists from different parts of the world
to clarify the particularity of universal claims!
TOWARD FEASIBLE GLOBAL SOCIOLOGIES
So, what does this mean for the development of global sociologies? One
form of global sociology, global sociology from above, is simply the uni-
versalization of a single, usually Northern, sociology. Here a comparison
with economics is pertinent. Economics has managed to constitute its
own object of analysis – the market economy – over which it has a mo-
nopoly of knowledge, and thereby it has created a theory and methodol-
ogy with claims to universal applicability. The center of this univocal but
ever-changing paradigm, is the United States. The paradigm imposes it-
self through transnational socialization (flows of students, prestige of US
credentials), through flows of resources (scholarships, research funding,
think tanks) and through the domination of international agencies (World
Bank, IMF, etc.), which employ mainly U.S. trained economists (Four-
cade 2006). A large part of its success lies with the constitution of “na-
tional economies” which underpin an ongoing synergy between profes-
sional and policy science. Once the Soviet order had disintegrated it was
hard to even imagine challenges to the domination of U.S. economics,
although, of course, Europe always had its alternative models and there
have been critiques emanating from the South. Undoubtedly, their suc-
cess in creating a distinctive object of knowledge and in convincing oth-
ers of their insights into its working undergirds the influence of econo-
mists in diverse political fields (Fourcade 2009).
Sociology is different in that it has not successfully constituted its
own object over which it has a monopoly of knowledge. Therefore, there
has been no umbilical cord connecting professional and policy sociol-
ogy – although a close approximation may be found in Scandinavia. Gen-
erally, efforts to establish a single paradigm with “society” as its object
have failed. There is simply no well-defined object that sociologists study
and over which they have a monopoly of knowledge. They study every-
thing: from institutions to identities, from states to schools, from econo-
mies to families, from deviance to consent, from domination to social
movements. The ISA has 55 research committees, all focused on different

topics. Thus, instead of having its own object, sociology has a distinctive
standpoint, namely the standpoint of civil society – those institutions,
organizations, and movements that inhabit the space between economy
and state. This does not mean that sociology only studies civil society.
Rather it studies state and market through their effects on civil society,
and vice versa how civil society provides the conditions of existence of
state and market. Because civil society is made up of competing forces,
organized into patterns of domination and exclusion, so sociology is a
contested and plural discipline, very different from the paradigmatic sci-
ence of economics.
To look upon sociology as defined by its standpoint means to recog-
nize that the sociologist is simultaneously observer of and participant in
society, that there is no place outside society not even for the scientist.
Sociology, therefore, is always potentially an actor within the society it
studies. In taking up such a stance sociology is necessarily skeptical of
economists’ claims to neutrality, objectivity and universality. Indeed,
these claims mask the interest of orthodox economics in the unrestricted
expansion of markets, an expansion that threatens civil society and thus,
not just sociology but also humanity’s capacity to protect itself against,
for example, the degradation of the environment and labor. Sociology
becomes, therefore, not only a potential opposition to economics in the
academic field but also contributes to the counter-movement against mar-
kets in the wider society.
As markets become global so sociology aspires to become global too,
contributing to a global civil society, knitting together communities, or-
ganizations and movements across national boundaries. If orthodox eco-
nomics is constituted globally from above through a process of academic
imperialism, global sociologies are laboriously constituted from below
out of particular national sociologies. This depends on the viability of
those national sociologies discussed in the previous section, and then on
building multiple connections among such national sociologies. This can
be done directly or through the development of regional ties and regional
sociologies, as has been done in Latin America, Europe and North Amer-
ica, and to a lesser extent in Asia and the Arab World. Moreover, through
such linkages and circulations, conferences and joint projects, weaker
sociologies are strengthened.
Building a global sociology from below is a daunting and precarious
task. If there is a paucity of collective actors in the world then sociology
may have little alternative but to enter the vacuum. Indeed, faced with the
possibility of being condemned to irrelevance, its very livelihood may be
at stake. Can we look for global actors of tomorrow in the legions of so-
26 Michael Burawoy
ciologists, whose peculiarity is to simultaneously diagnose and confront

the unequal world they inhabit. If sociology can be constituted as a col-
lective actor, can it also reach beyond a trade union defensiveness, impor-
tant though that is, to embrace wider interests and global awareness?
That’s the challenge of a global sociology.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alatas, Syed Farid. Alternative Discourses in Asian Social Science: Re-

sponses to Eurocentrism. New Delhi: Sage, 2006a.
____. “A Khaldunian Exemplar for a Historical Sociology for the South.”
Current Sociology 54, no.3 (2006b): 397-412.
Alatas, Syed Hussein. “The Captive Mind and Creative development.”
Internationl Social Science Journal 36 (1974): 691-99.
Albrow, Martin and Elizabeth King (eds.). Globalization, Knowledge and
Society. London: Sage, 1990.
Archer, Margaret. “Sociology for one World: Unity and Diversity.”
International Sociology 6, no.2 (1991): 131-47.
Akiwowo, Akinsola. “Contributions to the Sociology of Knowledge from
an African Oral Poetry.” International Sociology 1, no.4 (1986):
343-358.
Beck, Ulrich. The Cosmopolitan Vision. Cambridge, U.K., Polity Press,
2004.
Bourdieu, Pierre. “The Corporatism of the Universal: The Role of Intellectuals
in the Modern World.” Telos 81 (1989): 99-110.
Cardoso, Fernando Henrique. “Foreword.” International Sociology 1,
no.1 (1986): 1-2 Connell, Raewyn. Southern Theory: The Global
Dynamics of Knowledge in SocialScience. Crows Nest, NSW, Australia:
Allen and Unwin, 2007.
Fourcade, Marion. “The Construction of a Global Profession: The
Transnationalization of Economics.” American Journal of Sociology
112 (2006): 145-94.
____. Economists and Societies: Discipline and Profession in the United
States, Britain, and France 1890s to 1990s. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 2009.
Genov, Nikolai (ed.). National Traditions in Sociology. London: Sage,
1989.
Himmelstrand, Ulf. “The Role of the ISA in Internationalizing Sociology.”
Current Sociology 39 (1991): 85-100.
Oommen, T.K. “Internationalization of Sociology: A View from Developing
Countries.” Current Sociology 39 (1991): 67-84.
Patel, Sujata (ed.). The ISA Handbook of Diverse Sociological Traditions.

London: Sage, 2009.
Sztompka, Piotr. “One Sociology or Many?” in Patel (editor), The ISA
Handbook of Diverse Sociological Traditions, pp.21-28. London:
Sage, 2009 Wallerstein, Immanuel. The End of the World As We
Know It: Social Science for the Twenty-First Century. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, 1999.
28 Yuan-Tseh Lee
Challenges Facing Human Society

in the 21st Century
Yuan-Tseh Lee, Academia Sinica, Taiwan 1
It is a great honor for a natural scientist to be invited to present a lecture

at the 2009 Conference of the National Associations of the International
Sociological Association. My talk will be focused on the issues of energy,
the environment, and the challenges facing human society in the 21st cen-
tury.
THE RECENT DEVELOPMENT

OF HUMAN SOCIETY ON EARTH
After the appearance of our ancestors on the heavily forested planet a

couple of million years ago, the development of the human society as a
whole was in harmony with nature. Humankind was indeed a part of na-
ture, reliant on the sun to create most of what was needed to survive.
Since the population of humankind was small, for a long period of time
their limited activities seemed to have affected neither the biosphere nor
the living environment of humankind to any great extent.
However, the development of humankind took a new turn after the
industrial revolution, which began about two hundred and fifty years ago.
As humankind learned to transform energy from one form to another –
from chemical, thermal, and electrical to mechanical – and invented vari-
ous machines that could perform work thousands of times more power-
fully, more precisely, and more reliably than could possibly be done with
human and animal labor, the productivity of humankind increased im-
mensely, and an unprecedented improvement of living standards was
achieved. The success of humankind on the surface of the earth had been
quite remarkable. But, during this process, humankind became addicted
to the use of a large amount of energy, and since the energy from the
biomass created by sunshine no longer satisfied our needs, we began to
depend more and more on fossil fuels - coal, natural gas, and petroleum -
1
Yuan-Tseh Lee is the President-Elect of International Council for Science and
the President Emeritus of Academia Sinica.
Challenges Facing Human Society in the 21st Century 29
which were buried under the ground and had taken millions of years to
accumulate. In the USA in 1850, 90% of the energy depended on wood
burning, but 80 years later, by 1930, 90% of the energy came from the
combustion of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels also provided energy and feed
stock needed for the production of various new materials, such as plastics,
fertilizer, synthetic fibers, steel, and cement, and regrettably people had
drastically changed the intimate relation between humans and nature.
The harmonious relation between people and the biosphere was disrupted,
and the important role played by the sun in the development of human-
kind, or the philosophical view of Confucius that “Man and Nature are
but one,” somehow seemed to have been forgotten.
As we entered the 21st century, we began to realize that the current
development patterns of human society were not sustainable. Problems
related to population explosion, natural resource depletion, and the dam-
age done to the living environment have become quite serious. In a sense,
the earth was once regarded as “infinite” or “unlimited” for humankind,
not only because of the resources available but also due to the ability of
the earth to digest all the waste that humankind produced. However,
from the point of view of the damage done to the ecosystem or the living
environment, the earth as a whole should be considered “limited” and
“overdeveloped” at present. For example, carbon dioxide produced by
human activities is far exceeding the earth’s capacity to absorb it through
the growth of the forest, coral reefs, and other mechanisms, and the trend
of global warming is threatening the very existence of human beings on
Earth. It is quite ironic that during the 20th century not only are the “de-
veloped” countries overdeveloped, but so-called “developing” countries
are also overdeveloped. It is unfortunate that so-called “developing”
countries are following in the footsteps of “developed” countries and
marching along the unsustainable path established by “developed coun-
tries” in the past when the earth was still “unlimited.”
It is extremely important for humankind to wake up immediately and
acknowledge the fact that the human society as a whole is living beyond
its means. We must learn to work together as a community to find new,
sustainable ways to re-establish an intimate relationship with biosphere,
live in harmony with nature, and return to a more direct relationship with
the mighty power of the sun. After all, it was the sun that brought us all
together here on the surface of the earth.
30 Yuan-Tseh Lee
ISSUES RELATED TO ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
One of the most urgent problems people face today is related to the rela-
tionship between energy and the environment, especially global warming
trends caused by the emission of greenhouse gases, and energy crises
caused by the widening gap between the limited supply and rapidly grow-
ing demand for petroleum and other fossil fuels. The other problem,
which threatens to wipe out large portions of humanity in a short time, is
the spread of infectious diseases, like those caused by virus H5N1.
It is comforting to know that, at present, the energy absorbed by the
surface of the earth in one hour is approximately equal to the total energy
consumption of the entire world in a year. In other words, the amount of
energy the surface of the earth absorbs is approximately ten thousand
times the energy consumed by the human society. It means that if we
were clever enough, we could depend entirely on solar energy. For ex-
ample, if an inexpensive practical photovoltaic cell, which converts 10%
of solar energy to electricity, becomes available, it will only take 1% of
the planet’s land area to generate enough electric energy to satisfy the
energy needs of the entire world. If the electrical energy generated by a
photovoltaic cell could be effectively stored or used to electrolyze water
into hydrogen and oxygen—or to even more directly dissociate water by
using a combination of photovoltaic cells—it is not inconceivable that
countries with large land masses could become energy exporting coun-
tries, nor that hydrogen gas might then become a major energy source as
we enter the age of the “hydrogen economy.” If we learn to produce bio-
fuel more efficiently or invent efficient “artificial leaves,” their photosyn-
thesis might provide enough biomass on Earth to satisfy our need for liq-
uid fuel and other chemical feed stocks now provided by petroleum.
THE DILEMMAS OF LIVING IN

A PARTIALLY-GLOBALIZED WORLD
Although we have witnessed the process of the globalization of human

society during the last few decades, the process is only half complete, and
because of this, we are suffering the consequences. Owing to highly-
developed transportation and communication technologies, our world is
relatively smaller than it once was, and it appears that the concept of a
global village is slowly taking root as a number of human activities, most
notably in the economic sphere, become globalized. The spread of dis-
ease around the world is another example. With thousands of airplanes
daily crossing oceans and continents, loaded with people and goods, dis-
ease-causing bacteria, viruses, and other microbes certainly will not be

confined to specific locations. Similarly, environmental problems such as
the depletion of the ozone layer by chlorofluorocarbons and global warm-
ing trends caused by greenhouse gases are problems that must be ad-
dressed on a global scale. On the other hand, in spite of the increased
international collaboration in the areas of science and technology, high-
tech economic competition is still largely carried out on a national basis.
Currently, in the partially-globalized world, it is quite clear that only
those people who are able to stage their activities on a global scale are
benefiting enormously. For that reason, it is not surprising that we will
have to tackle such problems as the widening gap between the rich and
the poor, both among countries and between people within a country, nor
that threats to solve problems by military force have not disappeared.
These problems might be avoided if the entire world were to become
“one community.”
We should also realize that though the globalization of the world
economy is driving us toward a borderless society, it will not reduce the
differences among peoples in various regions overnight. Establishing a
new, common global culture, together with more effective ways of com-
municating among all the peoples, will certainly take time. The differ-
ences among cultural heritages, languages, and religions that make this
world so rich and colorful will not, and should not, be made to disappear.
As the world shrinks in relative terms, and contact between peoples be-
comes more frequent, whether or not the differences in civilizations are
likely to cause an inevitable crash (as suggested by the well-known
scholar Samuel Huntington), seems to depend entirely on how well peo-
ple around the world learn to communicate and to understand, appreciate,
and respect each other’s cultural heritage. To become good citizens of the
global village, we need to learn quickly and also to teach our young peo-
ple to take a global view and to respect, appreciate, and understand the
different cultures of different peoples. In this regard, scientists can cer-
tainly lead the way.
THE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY IN SOCIETY FORUM

IN KYOTO
In the fall of 2004, Mr. Omi, the former Minister of Finance of Japan,
organized a very important annual forum in Kyoto, called “The Science
and Technology in Society Forum.” More than six hundred leading sci-
entists, business leaders, and policy makers were invited every year from
all over the world to discuss problems related to the subject matter of the
32 Yuan-Tseh Lee
forum. The forum aroused great enthusiasm among participants and has
since become a very successful and important annual event. This past
October, in 2008, the fifth forum was held with more than 600 attendees.
Mr. Omi made two important points when he described the funda-
mental concept of this forum in the opening ceremony of the first forum.
He mentioned positive and negative aspects of the rapid progress of sci-
ence and technology, and he noted that the benefits of science and tech-
nology have not yet reached everyone equally, which, as he said, “Is
really what symbolizes the lights and shadows of science and technol-
ogy.” While their negative aspects must be properly controlled, the posi-
tive features of science and technology should be promoted.
Mr. Omi’s other important point was stated thus: “Today’s problems
are global and can not be solved by any single country or by scientists
alone.” He went on to say, “Boundaries between nations are merely lines
on a map; nature makes no such distinctions. We should think of our-
selves as members of humankind, whose very existence will be at risk if
we do not live in accordance with the principles of Mother Nature.” In-
deed, if an astronaut observes the beautiful earth from a spacecraft, the
astronaut will not find any national boundaries.
I believe most of us sitting in this room would support this idea with-
out hesitation. However, if we do not try to answer some other questions
related to the fact that the earth is “limited’ and the world is only “par-
tially globalized,” our efforts to find solutions might encounter some dif-
ficulties. For example, we must also ask, “How many people could the
planet support if we were to extend the living standard of the people in
the so-called ‘developed countries’ to everyone on Earth?” It is interest-
ing to note that when India became independent, in response to the ques-
tion of how the people in that country could catch up with the living stan-
dard of the people in Great Britain, Gandhi rightfully recognized that it
would take the natural resources of many Planet Earths for the people in
India to have the British way of life. It is just impossible.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Many of the problems we face today are problems that cannot be solved
with current scientific knowledge and technologies; they await the accu-
mulation of new knowledge and the development of new technologies.
That is why it is so important to continue our efforts to advance science
and technology and to educate a new generation of creative scientists.
During the long history of humankind, our ancestors invented various
technologies in order to survive better or to improve their quality of life.
Their curiosity and their desire to understand natural phenomena were the
basis of the advancement of science. Until about one hundred years ago,
the advancement of science was driven by the available technology; only
during the last century have technological advances been led by the re-
sults of scientific research.
In recent years, we have observed encouraging improvements in
international scientific collaboration. Many projects have been initiated;
many agreements have been signed. Year after year, we have discussed
“capacity building” in science, technology, and education for developing
countries, but the worsening situation of the entire world has yet to find
its turning point. For example, the rain forest, which is often compared
with the lung of a human body, is continuing to disappear from the sur-
face of the earth. For the past decade, every summer we have witnessed
the thick dark smog generated by the forest fires in Indonesia contaminate
not only the air in Indonesia, but also in their neighboring countries. It is
not realistic to blame or to expect Indonesia to be able to keep their rain
forest from disappearing. Unless we consider the protection of the rain
forest in Indonesia “our responsibility” and raise enough funds to help
Indonesia to establish a protected “global rain forest,” no matter how se-
riously we engage in international scientific collaboration, the rain forest
will continue to disappear.
We should all recognize the fact that the increasingly interconnected
world cannot be a safe place if a large portion of its population still suf-
fers from grinding poverty, disease, illiteracy, lack of education, unem-
ployment, and other barriers to survival. Scientists can play key roles in
finding the solutions to these problems. Especially if we learn to solve
problems together; learn to share knowledge, new technological options,
and the limited resources available; and learn to respect and understand
different cultural heritages, then it will be possible to realize the estab-
lishment of a genuine global village that makes sustainable development
possible for all.
In order for science and technology to solve the problems man faces
in the 21st century, it is not enough to advance science and technology at a
faster pace. The advancement of science and technology certainly will
solve many problems we are facing today and will also shape the devel-
opment of human society of the future. However, the serious problems
related to sustainable development will not be solved unless we pay spe-
cial attention to the roles played by science and technology in this “finite”
and “half-globalized” world, learn to work together beyond national
boundaries, and pay more attention to our collective “global competitive-
ness” for solving the problems of the entire world, rather than continuing
to worry about the “national competitiveness” of our own countries.
34 Yuan-Tseh Lee
At present, the entire world consists of more than one hundred na-
tion-states. One of the duties of the government of a nation-state is to
collect taxes from its citizen and businesses to solve the nation’s prob-
lems and redistribute wealth. As the world has become more and more
globalized, it has become obvious that there is a need for some sort of
“global government” that can resolve the conflict between the interests of
nation-states and the interests of the entire world.
The best way to work together beyond national boundaries is to make
national boundaries disappear all together. Although it might take a long
time, our future certainly will depend on how soon all of us in different
countries learn to operate as “one community” for the entire world, and
we do not have much time to waste. Perhaps the European Union is a
step in that direction. Half way through the 21st Century, the formation of
the “Global Union of the Planet of Earth” might become a reality, and
then the sustainable development of the entire world might become pos-
sible. Otherwise, in the not too distant future, the solar system might
send the farewell message to humankind on Earth.
Sociology in Times of Crisis 35
Sociology in Times of Crisis

Michel Wieviorka, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales,
Paris, France 1
Translated by Kristin Couper
We have entered an era since September 2008 that countless observers,

analysts, economists, and politicians have described as one of “crisis.”
The term has become the key word of the moment. At the same time, the
explanation we are offered to account for this phenomenon is something
of a stereotype.
How should the present crisis be understood? By far, the majority of
the commentators tell us that the simplest thing is to follow the sequence
of events. Thereafter, we are presented with a story that is always the
same, apart from a few variations in detail; Jacques Attali’s (2008) book
constitutes a paradigm. We are told that, in the first instance, the crisis
was financial (credit for consumer goods and especially the American
housing “bubble,” the “subprimes,” “securitization,” the failures of finan-
cial institutions or banks, avoided in the last resort thanks to the interven-
tion of states, etc.). It spread in the form of a worldwide social and eco-
nomic crisis (so-called “technical” unemployment, axing of jobs, closing
of firms, poverty, etc.). It will perhaps have dramatic political repercus-
sions with violence, riots, and populist, nationalist, or extreme left forms
of radicalization. Sooner or later, after a difficult period, it will be re-
solved. This will be the “way out of the crisis;” the economy will pick up
again, cleaned up and perhaps strengthened, working more smoothly
thanks to a banking system which has been improved under the leader-
ship of states which have led the way to a recovery of confidence, thanks
perhaps also to substantial progress having been made in global-level
governance of the economy and finance.
Of course, this narrative is not entirely false. However, in many re-
spects, it is unbearable. Its economism tends to be over-simplistic; eco-
nomics is the explanation for everything. The Marxist overtones are as-
tonishing on the part of those who have developed it; if we are to believe
them, the economic infrastructure controlled the political-ideological su-
perstructure, as if the political actors were in no way responsible for the

1
Michel Wieworka is President of the International Sociological Association.

36 Michel Wieviorka

catastrophe. All that is required is simply to await a reversal of the situa-

tion, which is already taking shape and is referred to as “the return of the
state.”
This narrative also has the overtones of a “saga” with a happy ending
of the type: we’re going to suffer; we’ll have to tighten our belts, but
we’ll get over it. And, those who created it, be they experts, economists,
or others, are not lacking in self-confidence. They did not see what was
coming, but they present themselves as qualified to explain in a learned
fashion what happened and what the future will be like, even going as far
as suggesting the most appropriate public policies to adopt.
Moreover, when they are questioned, they state that some of them
had forecast the American scenario, the inevitable bursting of the bubble
associated with unbridled credit, in the property market and for consumer
goods. At most, they concede that they did not imagine the extension of
the crisis to the planet as a whole and with such rapidity; those who have
been speaking about globalization for the past twenty years without ever
imagining that it could also lead to a “global” crisis have no hesitation in
declaring that this is the first crisis in globalization.
This narrative also has an implicit characteristic that deserves to be
made explicit. It does break, and very rightly so, with the image of a type
of disassociation specific to globalization which is said to have discon-
nected the financial economy from the real economy. On the contrary, by
insisting on the consequences of the financial crisis on employment,
growth, the standard of living, the GDP (gross domestic product), etc.,
this narrative points to links between the two registers, links that are cer-
tainly very complex.
But, are these repetitive remarks that always tell us the same story
apart from a few variations the only way to look at the crisis? Here, soci-
ology definitely has other analyses to offer us. I even think that sociolo-
gists should make the “crisis” a priority in their interventions. A com-
parison enables us make the point forcefully: sociologists cannot continue
to go about their business while the boat is sinking.
THE CRISIS AS THE PROBLEM OF A SYSTEM
The social sciences have developed on the basis of dealing with causes
for concern that frequently evoked the idea of crisis. Thus, the concept of
anomie, popularized by Emile Durkheim, refers directly to the idea of
crisis. From this point of view, crisis means that a system (in particular a
social, political, or economic one) is not working well, is getting stuck
and changing in a way that cannot be controlled; this engenders reactions

in behavior which are themselves linked, for example, to frustrations and

fears.
Anomie, in Durkheim’s definition of the term, is the lack or ineffi-
cacy of norms in a society. Durkheim introduced the concept of anomie2
in The Division of Labour in Society (1893) and used it primarily in Sui-
cide (1897). In particular, he differentiated between anomic suicide and
other modalities of the phenomenon; anomic suicide occurs when norms
are absent or else is due to the fact that anomie is long-standing, for ex-
ample in industrial work, in trade, or when an abrupt transition leads to
loss of efficacy of norms which no longer succeed in regulating behavior.
For example, in times of financial crisis, anomie incites people to suicide.
In an article that is frequently quoted, the concept of anomie was
taken up again and transformed by Robert Merton (1938) to explain devi-
ance. With Merton, anomie ceases to be in the norms and values which
become confused or disappear, as in Durkheim; it resides in the means to
succeed in achieving aims or legitimate, clear values which are in no way
in crisis. The deviant accepts values that are socially recognized, but he
uses non-legitimate means to achieve them. The values may be, for ex-
ample, individual success; the legitimate means to achieve this are, for
example, work or education. Now, some people are going to use illegiti-
mate means, such as crime or delinquency, to achieve the individual suc-
cess that the others earn as a result of study or professional activities.
This idea leads to the hypothesis of the conformism of deviants: like eve-
ryone else, they want money or signs of social success, but they achieve
them by means that do not conform.
We should add that the concept of anomie implies that there is a soci-
ety, an idea that might deserve to be discussed or criticized. The fact re-
mains that, both with Emile Durkheim and the American functionalists of
the 1930s, 40s, or 50s, the crisis refers in the first instance to the idea of a
breakdown in the system or of a system and, in particular, to the idea of a
problem of social bond. There is a break or the threat of a break in soli-
darity or in the social fabric; there is a lack of confidence.
In some way, spontaneous sociology and also the sociology behind
most of the stereotypical discourses on the present crisis concord fairly
well with the classical categories which have just been described. If we
restrict ourselves to these discourses, it is expected that in the context of a
close correspondence between society, nation, and the state, measures
will be taken by state authorities to restore confidence in economic and
financial matters. Furthermore, those in power expect the population to
rally behind them in the name of the higher interest of the nation. The

2
The word had been used before him by Jean-Marie Guyau (1885).
38 Michel Wieviorka

idea that by combating the crisis efficiently, violence will be avoided,

radicalization minimized, and the move to extremes restrained also be-
longs to this same classical sociology. The crisis, here, is a temporary
problem in the social system; it is a state of disaster of one or several so-
cieties which it is the task of their states to end, with the help of interna-
tional agreements or negotiations and by means of appropriate policies,
for example plans for reviving economic growth. Apart from the state,
there are not many actors in this type of approach; at the most, there are
the actors whose behavior ought to be regulated or governed by public
instances: bankers, financiers, and traders who acted improperly in the
previous period.
Approaches to the crisis which originate in Durkheim or in function-
alism can lead to the idea that it is time to change the social system or the
type of society, but in most instances they extend into appeals for an end
to the present difficulties and a return to the state ex ante. On this basis,
the sociologist can intervene in the discussion. His or her intervention
will be aimed at proposing remedies and solutions, rather than helping in
the formation of actors and, by clarifying things for them, enabling them
to improve their mobilization in the face of the crisis.
“CRISIOLOGY”
In the late 1960s, Edgar Morin (1968) proposed the development of a

scientific study of the crisis, or “crisiology.” As we shall see below, this
was a premonitory text, because it was written in the historical context
where the general transformation which culminated in what we know to-
day as “the” crisis was taking shape. Morin considered that the crisis can
be an event which both reveals and has an effect. First, as an event that
reveals, it reveals what usually remains invisible; it forces us to hear
things we do not wish to hear. The crisis reveals elements that are inher-
ent to the real and are not merely accidents; it constitutes a moment of
truth. Thus, we could say that the present crisis reveals unbridled capital-
ism, in particular financial capitalism, in all its brutality and its extreme
injustice. Above all, we see that it constitutes a paroxysm in a process
that started long before September 2008. Second, as an event that has an
effect, Morin explains that the crisis sets in motion not only forces of de-
composition, disorganization, and destruction, but also forces of trans-
formation. In these cases, it is also a critical point in a process that in-
cludes dimensions of construction, innovation, and invention.
This idea of a critical point is reinforced by the etymology. The word
krisis in Greek means decision, and it was first used in medicine. The

crisis is the critical point that enables the diagnosis, as Edgar Morin re-
minds us. From this point of view, the crisis is not only synonymous
with congestion, impotence, a situation to be endured, and, as a conse-
quence, the development of irrational elements that give rise to deregula-
tion and a hardening of positions, the “paralysis” and “stiffening of what
constituted the organizational flexibility of the system,” notes Edgar
Morin. But, it also constitutes, on the contrary, a condition that is favor-
able to the actions and decisions of some actors and enables or even
forces actors to think and improve their analysis in order to improve their
action. Morin states:
At one and the same time we can grasp the inadequacy and the interest
of the concept of crisis: there is something inherent to it which is uncer-
tain since it corresponds to a regression of the determinism specific to
the system in question, therefore to a regression in knowledge. But this
regression can and must be compensated for by progress in the under-
standing of the complexity associated with crises. (140-141)
Continuing in the idea that the crisis both “has an effect” and “re-
veals,” Edgar Morin invites us therefore to admit that the crisis demon-
strates that what was a matter of course is in fact a source of difficulties
and presents problems; what worked had its limits, its drawbacks, and its
inadequacies. The crisis therefore constitutes an incentive to invent
something new. But, this incentive is imperative in a very particular con-
text, in which emotions, passions, and fears tend to pervert reason and, in
particular, the endeavor to get out of the crisis by rational means. It is a
commonplace but one which corresponds to many realities to recall that
in times of crisis many seek scapegoats, populism is likely to develop,
and actors become more radical. It must be forcefully stated that in times
of crisis, forms of behavior may also involve sectarianism, resort to
magic and the irrational, and assume the garb of messianic movements.
The forms of behavior are many and varied and do not conform to any
sort of determinism; most of them are all the more alarming given that
actors or a system in crisis develop in ways which are much less foresee-
able and much more random than do actors in a system which works. But,
crisis-type behavior can even take many other forms. In particular, these
may include discouragement, apathy, as Marie Jahoda, Paul Lazarsfeld
and Hans Zeisel (1933) observed in the classical study of unemployed
workers in Marienthal, a small town in Austria where anomie was the
predominant form of behavior at the beginning of the 1930s before the
Nazis transformed it into forms of collective behavior and mobilization.
40 Michel Wieviorka

In a crisis, disorder and rigidity are at work. But, in so far as the cri-
sis is subject to the unknown, in the last resort, it does leave room for
maneuver for individual strategies or the action of an active minority.
The crisis is a disruption of a system in which uncertainties arise, but
there are also new opportunities; this disruption is two-fold. It operates
both in the sphere of social reality and in our knowledge; it opens up new
perspectives in action and in learning.
But, let’s take a step further. Seen from this perspective, is the crisis
a characteristic of the system that it affects, or does it indicate the way
out? If we follow Edgar Morin, it tends to be the first path that we should
take. He states that we can only develop a theory of crisis:
If we have a theory of society which is also systematic, cybernetic and

subject to negative entropy. To understand the crisis, if we want to go
beyond the idea of disruption, ordeal, and equilibrium, we have to un-
derstand society as a system capable of experiencing crises, that is, a
complex system which includes antagonisms without which the theory
of the society is inadequate and the notion of crisis is unthinkable. (142)
In this case, crisis is a characteristic, in the last resort a property of

the complex system constituted by the society, a system that can trans-
form itself or retrieve its own form of regulation. But, why not envisage
a second path and see the crisis as the convulsion in the transition from
one system to another, in any event a deciding phase in a process of
change in the system?
Both of these hypotheses deserve to be applied to the analysis of ac-
tual crises. For example, Lenin in his time adopted the second one when
he explained that in his opinion the main point was not that the actors be
revolutionaries but that the situation be so, that is, defined in terms of
crisis. The change in system became possible in 1917 in Russia from the
point at which the crisis had become generalized, social, and political but
also international and military, and the regime of the Czar was collapsing.
Finally, we also find an interesting question in Morin: does the crisis
come from within the system which it affects, or from without? There,
too, there is no single answer but separate experiences depending on
which crises are under consideration. The disruption may come from
without, for example, in the case of climatic catastrophes. It can also
come from within, from a process that at the outset is not a theoretical
source of crisis but that produces it with the result that the system is no
longer self-regulating. In Marx, for example, crises in capitalism can
originate in a contradiction that has become too great between the rela-
tions of production and the development of the productive forces. The

crisis then arises when the system becomes incapable of resolving the
difficulties that until then it was capable of resolving. Morin states that
the crisis is “the absence of solution (phenomena of deregulation and dis-
organization) which, as a result, is capable of creating a solution (a new
form of regulation, gradual transformation)” (143-144). Here, he concurs
in a way with Michel Dobry (1992), for whom the most interesting aspect
of the sociology of crises lies in envisaging not the external disruption but
the internal disruption and the processes of deregulation consequent to it:
dysfunctioning and deregulation.
Thus, with the “crisiology” outlined by Edgar Morin, we have paths
or hypotheses that may enable us to tackle the present crises with catego-
ries other than those of the stereotypical discourse in which economics
and politics predominate. As we shall see, the exercise is worth trying.
THE GREAT TRANSFORMATION
On the basis of what we have just said, it is possible to suggest a very

different argument from the one that underlies the usual economic ap-
proaches to the present-day crisis. It consists in setting the present crisis
into a long-term historical context and seeing it as a particular point in a
process of change that started in the developed countries with the oil cri-
sis that followed the Yom Kippur War.
Immediately after World War II, the developed countries imple-
mented models of functioning and developing which had been taking
shape before the war, on one hand, in dealing with the crisis in 1929 and
sometimes also, as was the case in France, within the Resistance (during
World War II). These models, which have their Western versions and
their Soviet versions, presented distinct characteristics, even if diverse
variants could be seen: relatively strong growth, considerable intervention
on the part of the state, confidence in science, a real capacity to project
themselves into the future, and the idea that production opens the way to
progress. Upward social mobility was a promise in which many could
believe. Economic and social thinking gave primacy of place to the state
and the nation as the framework for analysis and action, a framework that
was rounded off by the Westphalian concept of international relations.
The economy of industrial societies was one in which work was or-
ganized according to principles of scientific organization; there was a
belief in the Taylorian concept of “one best way.” Education was becom-
ing more democratic and the university more open, but not necessarily to
all. The processes of migration were relatively limited and above all did
not seem to pose major problems. At a global level, decolonization was a
42 Michel Wieviorka
source of immense hopes about peoples’ and nations’ capacity to control

their own destinies, and the Cold War provided a principle of structuring
conflict that, on the whole, organized peace, rather more than war and
violence.
Lastly, politics were dominated in the democracies by the idea of a
Left/Right opposition representing primarily the world of the working
class in opposition to domination and the capitalist order.
All this, briefly outlined, began to fall apart in the mid 1970s, some-
times earlier, and often later (in Eastern European countries). We then
entered a long period of transformation, marked on one hand by the de-
composition of these models from the post-World War Two years and on
the other by the invention, or the outlines, of what could be termed other
models.
The present financial crisis must therefore be presented in the context
of a different narrative from the one offered by the majority of the
economists for whom the point of departure is the “subprime” crisis and
the extension of the crisis in the American property market to the planet
and to all spheres of the economy. Instead, it must be considered a cli-
mactic moment in a long, therapeutic process, a difficult and chaotic way
out of the old models; from this same perspective, it must also be envis-
aged as a point in time when tomorrow’s models could be being invented
or taking shape. On the basis of Morin’s “crisiology,” it is possible to
conceive of recent events in a historical time-scale which does not begin
with the “subprimes” and which does not restrict the crisis to the “ef-
fects” or “consequences” of the deviations of the financial system. This
is not a linear historical development but one in which one world is tak-
ing shape while, at the same time, another is disappearing.
CRISIS AND CONFLICT
In the social sciences, it is possible to discern ways of thinking which

differ from and are even opposed to those which focus on society or on
the system, considered in its totality and in its difficulties maintaining
integration; these promote an approach based on the idea of an insuffi-
ciency, a lack, a loss, or a deficit of conflictuality. In these cases, the
analysis focuses not so much on the system or on the society as on the
actors who do not succeed or no longer succeed or have not yet suc-
ceeded in setting up a conflictual relation, with the crisis representing the
complete opposite of this type of relation.
A conflict exists when actors are involved in a relationship that they
recognize as binding them and opposing them; the actors admit that the

relationship involves issues, that these issues are the same for all, and that
each of them is endeavoring to control or master them.
These issues can be situated at various levels, and sociological theory
may endeavor to rank them. Thus, in the 1970s, Alain Touraine (1974)
suggested comparing three different levels of conflict, on the one hand,
with three different levels of crisis on the other. He distinguished the
highest level in sociological terms, which he called the level of historicity,
at which the control of the main orientations of community life are de-
cided:
This distance that society places between itself and its activity and this
action by which it determines the categories of its practice I call his-
toricity. Society is not what it is but what it makes itself be: through
knowledge, which creates a state of relations between society and its
environment; through accumulation, which subtracts a portion of avail-
able product from the cycle leading to consumption; through the cul-
tural model, which captures creativity in forms dependent upon the so-
ciety’s practical dominion over its own functioning. (4)
At the level of historicity, therefore, the conflict, in the vocabulary

used by Alain Touraine, refers to the existence of a social movement,
which is the action of an actor who is dominated and controlled, engaged
in a struggle with the major actors and leaders for the control of historic-
ity. Thus, in an industrial society, the most important issue at stake in the
conflict between the working class movement and the employers was the
control of the organization of labour, particularly the control of invest-
ment and the appropriation and use of the fruits of labour. In turn, at this
level of historicity, the crisis emerges when the social conflict is either
not possible or no longer possible, when it destroys the state and over-
takes it, when it is incapable of acting and representing a social entity in
its present state but also in its future and in its past. The crisis emerges
when there is an absence of state power or when it is reduced to the mere
exercise of force and is itself overcome and overwhelmed. A state that is
in profound crisis generates reactive forms of behavior that may ulti-
mately culminate in revolution. For example, in Russia in 1917 there was
effectively a social movement of workers, but if there was a revolution it
was not because the workers and the employers were at loggerheads; it
was because the Russian State, as I said, had collapsed and was losing the
war. Moreover, as soon as the Revolution was victorious, the new Soviet
power lost no time in crushing the working class movement and in mak-
ing the trade unions “transmission belts” controlled by it. This example
nevertheless invites us to recognize that there may be a complex relation-
44 Michel Wieviorka

ship between social movements and the revolution, or the conflict and the
crisis, more generally speaking.
Crisis does not necessarily prevent conflict; crisis has an impact on
conflict just as it may also be the origin or the outcome of conflict.
Therefore, let us be wary of over-simplistic arguments that might evoke
an image of a connection between the two as if the violence of the con-
flict was inversely related to the extent of the crisis. Reality is more
complex. Instead, a more balanced way of putting it would be to say that
the sphere of conflict increases when that of the crisis declines and vice
versa, but without any idea of this being pre-determined or automatic.
When this can clarify things, let us be ready to combine in our analyses
the hypothesis of conflict and that of crisis, and their interaction when
they are mixed. For example, if we take May 1968 in France, we can
make an analytical distinction between 1) the dimensions of conflict and
of social movement – firstly the students, then the workers – and 2) ele-
ments of crisis, in particular in the university system and the political re-
gime.
Alain Touraine also suggests considering two other categories that
are at a lower level, in sociological terms, than that of historicity. At the
political or institutional level, there is a crisis if the political system is
blocked, proves to be incapable of dealing with the demands that come
from society or from certain of its sectors, or is incapable of shaping so-
cial discussion. For example, Italian terrorism, for which many explana-
tions were advanced in the 70s and 90s, was in many respects due to the
political crisis. In the context of the rapprochement between the left (the
Italian Communist Party, or ICP) and the right (Christian Democrats),
moving together towards a “historical compromise,” the ICP became in-
capable of dealing politically with demands which were classically their
domain, in particular those which emanated from the youth of the time.
Young people, who were often qualified and, at the time, could only find
jobs on production lines, dreamt of another culture and, realizing that the
university was becoming a way of controlling them, were swept into the
violence of terrorist organizations. 3 Generally speaking, crisis-type con-
duct often takes the form of violence.
At the political or institutional level, the conflict, as opposed to the
crisis, assumes the garb of pressures from actors to improve their relative
position within a political system in order to gain entry or to increase
their influence; this is the main lesson of what is known as the theory of
“resource mobilization.”

3
I take this example since I studied it in-depth in my (1993) book The Making of
Terrorism.

Lastly, and still in the wake of Alain Touraine, at an even lower level,
there is an opposition between crisis and conflict within organizations. In
these instances, the conflict is a relationship within which actors endeavor
to obtain a better reward in return for their contribution; the organiza-
tional crisis is a sign of disorganization, an incapacity to deal with inter-
nal problems and to face the outside world. It expresses deterioration, a
hiatus between values and discourse; here, also, it may be conveyed by
violent forms of conduct.
In all cases, violence may equally well be associated with a conflict
and in this case appear as instrumental, like a tool or a resource mobilized
by some actors to achieve their aims or be associated with a crisis of
purely expressive and even desperate forms of conduct, for example, in
the form of a riot.
Now, let’s consider how these theoretical or general considerations
can help in clarifying our understanding of the present crisis.
THE CRISIS AS ABSENCE, LOSS, OR INSUFFICIENCY

OF CONFLICT
Let’s begin by considering the specifically social dimensions of the crisis.

The effects are all the more devastating since the major principle of con-
flictuality that structured societies like ours for at least a century and until
the mid-1970s, i.e., the opposition between the working class movement
and the employers, is no longer fundamental. Until recently, it was still
possible to contrast the Rhine model of capitalism, in which trade unions
and governing boards of firms confronted each other in the context of
highly institutionalized conflict, and the neo-American model, which pri-
oritized share-holders and financial, or even speculative, rationales.4
The neo-American model, which seems to have gained the upper
hand since then, signified the absolute domination of share-holders over
managers, of preferring the very short-term economic viability of invest-
ment over the long-term stability of the firm. If the economy has sud-
denly decelerated is this only due to a lack of liquidity? Is it not also be-
cause modes of organization have prioritized flexibility, the implications
of which have been so well described by Richard Sennett (2005) in The
Culture of the New Capitalism, at the expense of rationales of production
enabling the structuring of social relationships in firms between managers
and wage-earners?

4
See, for example, Albert (1991).
46 Michel Wieviorka

Two questions arise here. The first is that of the capacity of trade un-
ionism to make a comeback as a mobilized force in the firm, but also,
further, to have an impact as an actor of a political type. Can we imagine
a revival of trade union action? Does this not imply new forms of mili-
tancy or conditions that very specifically encourage wage-earners to join
trade unions? There would need to be appreciable changes in the running
and management of firms, the end of “neo-American” capitalism, which
seems an unrealistic aim and is not prominent in trade union mobilization
at the moment. The second question is: is trade unionism capable of pro-
jecting itself into the future by contributing to inventing new modes of
development? Is it not profoundly attached to the previous model, a pris-
oner of its major orientations, to the point that, when it does succeed in
mobilizing, it runs the risk of temporarily reviving the old system rather
than contributing to the construction of a new one? At the end of the
1970s and in the 1990s, some trade unions, like the CFDT in France, in-
novated by presenting themselves, timidly it’s true, as the political opera-
tor of new challenges including, in particular, ecologists, women, and the
anti-nuclear movement. This idea deserves to be re-examined and up-
dated. It does enable the trade union itself to be the traditional defender
of wage-earners, jobs, and standard of living, while at the same time con-
tributing to struggles which are not specific to it but which it realizes are
playing a role in leading us towards a new era.
Now, let’s look closely at the conflicts which signpost this shift, and
today let’s look specifically at the altermondialist (“another world”)
struggles.
In the 1990s, the recognition of the global nature of the major prob-
lems in the world was the motive force behind what was best in the al-
termondialist movement. At this point, this movement was pleading in
favor of another form of altermondialization; it introduced another prin-
ciple of conflictuality into the public sphere.
Since then, it has declined – a collateral victim in particular of the at-
tacks of September 11, 2001, which is not to say that it is historically-
speaking, bound to disappear – undermined by extreme politicization,
which frequently transforms it into an anti-imperialist, anti-war, and anti-
American force. Its decline deprives the discussions about the crisis and
the way out of the crisis of a challenge that, in its time, did put an end to
the arrogance of Davos. Paradoxically, it is an element in the present dif-
ficulties because it deprives us, in the wake of the decline of trade union-
ism, of a second principle of conflictuality. At a broader level, the sever-
ity of the present crisis seems to be accentuated by the difficulty which
the challenges concerning the planet, the environment, the supranational

regulation of economic life, the existence of a world-level form of justice,

etc., have in constructing a broader sphere for discussion and conflict.
Whether it be a question of trade unionism or new movements, there
is one hypothesis that seems to us to merit our attention: for sociologists,
consideration of the way out of the crisis should mean analyzing the con-
ditions which would enable the production and stimulation of actors en-
gaged in conflicts.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Albert, Michel. Capitalisme Contre Capitalisme. Paris: Seuil, 1991.

Attali, Jacques. La Crise et Après? Paris: Fayard, 2008.
Dobry, Michel. “Brève Note sur les Turpitudes de la Crisologie: Que
Sommes Nous en Droit de Déduire des Multiples Usages du Mot
‘Crise’?” Cahiers de la Sécurité Intérieure (IHESI) 7 (January 1992).
Durkheim, Emile. The Division of Labor in Society. New York: Simon
and Schuster, 1997. (Orig. pub. 1893).
-----. Suicide: A Study in Sociology. New York: Simon and Schuster,
1997. (Orig. pub. 1897).
Guyau, Jean-Marie. Esquisse d’une Morale Sans Obligation ni Sanction.
Paris: F. Alcan, 1885.
Jahoda, Marie, Paul Lazarsfeld, and Hans Zeisel. Marienthal: The Study
of an Unemployed Community. London: Tavistok, 1974 (Orig. pub.
1933).
Merton, Robert K. “Social Structure and Anomie.” American Sociologi-
cal Review 3, no. 5 (1938): 672-682.
Morin, Edgar. “Pour une Sociologie de la Crise.” Sociologie. Paris:
Fayard (1984): 139-153. Orig. pub. in Communications 25 (1968).
Sennett, Richard. The Culture of the New Capitalism. New Haven: Yale
Touraine, Alain. Production de la Société. Paris: Seuil, 1974.
Wieworka, Michel. The Making of Terrorism. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1993 (Orig. pub 1988).
48 Sujata Patel
The Imperative and the Challenge of Diversity:

Reconstructing Sociological Traditions in an
Unequal World
Since the 70s and particularly after the 90s, the dynamics of the world
have changed. Global integration has promoted a free flow of ideas, in-
formation, knowledge, goods, services, finance, technology, and even
diseases, drugs, and arms. At one level, the world has contracted. It has
opened up possibilities of diverse kinds of trans-border flows and move-
ments: those of capital, labour, and communication. Together with inter-
dependence of finances, new global practices have widened the arenas of
likely projects of cooperation and collaboration. And, paradoxically, it
has also created intense conflicts and increased militarization.
At another level, the contexts of flows of capital and labour have
changed; if these have encouraged voluntary migration, they have also
encouraged human trafficking, displaced populations, and made refugees.
Inequalities and hierarchies are now being differently organized even
though we manifestedly live in one global, capitalist world with a domi-
nant form and representation of modernity. Lack of access to livelihoods,
infrastructure, and political citizenship now blends with new forms of
exclusion - those of cultural and group identities as they are articulated in
uneven ways in distinct spatial locations.
Space is being reconstituted and articulated unevenly as sociabilities
crisscross within and between localities, regions, nation-states, and global
territories in tune with the changing nature of work and enterprise,
agency and identity. Each of these locations has thus become a signifi-
cant site of scrutiny and analysis, as sociabilities are being constituted
unevenly within many, multiple locations.
This process is and has challenged the constitution of agency of ac-
tors and groups of actors. Today, the globe is awash with differential
forms of collective and/or violent interventions, concurrently asserting
diverse representations of cultural identities together with livelihood dep-
rivations as the defining characteristic of these collectivities. Fluidity of
identities and its continuous expression in uneven and varied manifesta-
The Imperative and the Challenge of Diversity 49
tions demand a fresh perspective to assess and examine the world; it

needs to be perceived through many prisms.
Are sociology and sociologists across the world ready to take the
challenge that contemporary times pose for us? What kind of resources
do they have to tackle the demands presented by contemporary dynam-
ics? In the late nineteenth century and the twentieth century, the Europe-
ans and later the Americans took up the challenge to assess societal
changes facing their societies and evolved new perspectives. Does this
legacy have traditions of criticality to give us a language and resources to
cope with these challenges?
Sociologists declare that sociology is and remains the most reflexive
of all social sciences. The first moment of reflection emerged when
American sociology was institutionalizing the Parsonian approach in its
university structures. But these and similar interventions merely interro-
gated the silences of gender, race, ethnicity and other identities within
Europe and North America regions. There has been very little reflection
regarding the implicit and explicit assumptions of power that have gov-
erned the formation of the discipline in Europe and its export to other
regions of the globe.
The genealogy of this reflection in the US can be traced to Alvin
Gouldner’s (1971) seminal work, The Coming Crisis of Western Sociol-
ogy, and to the later criticisms that emerged with the growth of student
and feminist movements in the late sixties. This had its impact on Euro-
pean and American social theories, which, together with the impact of
new perspectives developed out of structuralism and post-structuralism,
reconstituted Marxism, feminism, environmentalism, and identity theory
and reframed social theory as many-faceted, plural, and eclectic. These
trends coincided with Wallerstein’s (1996) advocacy for the discipline to
“open” itself to incorporate the challenges from interdisciplinary social
sciences such as gender studies, environment studies, cultural studies, and
race and ethnicity studies.
These trends find recognition in texts such as Social Theory Today
(Giddens and Turner 1987), which argue that there is no agreement in the
profession about the fundamentals of what constitutes social theory.
European and American traditions of the discipline assert this theoretical
and methodological plurality. Neil Smelser (1994) treats it as an asset
when he says, “The benefit is living in a field that refuses to seal itself
into a closed paradigm and threatens to exhaust itself, but, rather, retains
the qualities of intellectual openness and imagination” (8).
In some fashion, this theme was reflected in Martin Albrow’s (1987)
statement in the inaugural issue of International Sociology, when he pro-
posed that the journal initiate an “… explicit search for [new] models of
50 Sujata Patel
inquiry and conceptual frames which can express the uniqueness of cul-
tures” (9). In spite of this felt need, within Europe and the USA, discus-
sion of sociological traditions has been generally restricted to a debate on
social theories, the development of a culture of professionalization, and
the affirmation of universality in its perspectives and practices. This uni-
versalisation locates the discussion of social theory in modernity and its
growth in Europe and spread across North America and later the rest of
the industrial developed world. For instance, Anthony Giddens (1996)
asserts, “Sociology is a generalising discipline that concerns itself above
all with modernity - with the character and dynamics of modern or indus-
trialised societies” (3).
It is in this context that we need to assess the recent interventions by
Jurgen Habermas (2001) and Ulrich Beck (2006) for a post-national and
trans-national social theory to embrace the new cosmopolitanism being
ushered in by contemporary globalization. But this position reasserts the
grounding of social theory in European modernity, in this case “the sec-
ond modernity.” It makes Beck claim, “Reality is becoming cosmopoli-
tan – this is a historical fact” (68).
At this juncture, it is imperative that we recall Charles Taylor’s
(1995) distinction of two kinds of modernity: cultural, wherein the theory
assesses transformations in terms of the rise of new culture, and acultural,
when theory examines transformations in terms of culturally neutral
terms, such as Western rationality or industrialization, and now globaliza-
tion. Taylor argues that most social theory is acultural and that Western
modernity is powered by its vision of positive good. This affirms West-
ern modernity as a moral outlook and distorts the theory at two levels.
The first is the miscalculation of changes related to the specific culture of
the West and the second is the universalization of facets of Western civi-
lization, such as science and religion, as perennial. Taylor asks us to re-
member that science has grown in the West “in close symbiosis with a
certain culture, in the sense … [of] a constellation of understandings of
person, nature, society, and the good” (27).
Beck’s argument on cosmopolitanism, I would contend, needs to be
rejected on similar grounds. He argues that there is interrelatedness and
interdependence of people across the globe, but this is assessed in terms
of certain specific features that are now universalized. These are the
emergence of supranational organizations in the area of economy, politics
of non-state actors, and civil society movements; normative precepts like
human rights; types and profiles of global risks; forms of warfare; and
global organized crime and terrorism. Their common denominator is
cosmopolitanization, i.e., the erosion of clear borders separating markets,
states, civilizations, cultures, and the life-worlds of common people. But
does it? Beck’s work remains located empirically within trends occurring
in Europe and has no comparative global analysis to support its position.
Of significance in this context is a lack of analysis regarding the
relationship between power, culture, and knowledge.
More interesting is Beck’s argument about methodological national-
ism, which he claims is based on the “national prison theory of human
existence” (12). He argues:
Until now, methodological nationalism has been dominant in sociology

and other social sciences on the assumption that they are nationally
structured. The result was a system of nation-states and corresponding
national sociologies that define their specific societies in terms of con-
cepts associated with the nation state. For the national outlook, the na-
tion-state creates and controls the ‘container’ of society and thereby at
the same time prescribes the limits of sociology. (2)
Beck’s assertion regarding nations and nationalism resonates with

those of other commentators. In the early eighties, Anthony Smith (1983)
argued that while sociologists have studied “society” as a bounded terri-
torial unit - the nation-state - they have failed to acknowledge that the
“study of society is always ipso facto the study of the nation” (26). In
The Consequences of Modernity, Anthony Giddens (1990) elaborates this
point when he states:
Now, understood in this way, ‘societies’ are plainly nation-states. Yet,

although a sociologist speaking of a particular society might casually
employ instead the term ‘nation’, or ‘country’, the character of the na-
tion-state is rarely directly theorized. In explicating the nature of the
modern societies, we have to capture the specific characteristics of the
nation-state - a type of social community which contrasts in a radical
way with pre-modern states. (13)
All three suggest that the subject matter of sociology is generally a

description of the categories of people, institutions, organizations, and
cultures of one’s own nationality. In this context, how can these be made
universal? Following this argument and in context with Taylor’s meth-
odological points mentioned above, it becomes imperative to explore the
relationship between explanatory schemas and styles of reasoning with
specific cultural contexts and representations of nation and nationalism,
rather than to assert an a priori universality. Rather, as Chakrabarty
(2000) has suggested, these sociologies should be categorized as provin-
cial.
52 Sujata Patel
Additionally implicated in nation and nationalism is control over ter-

ritory and the use of its economic, political, and cultural resources, proc-
esses and knowledges for the project of nation and nation-building not
only within one’s own nation-state but those of others, through colonial
and neo-colonial control. To what extent has European and American
theory assessed the impact of global distributions of power on the produc-
tion and reproduction of conservative, radical, and reflexive sociological
knowledge across the world?
From outside Europe and North America, we see the emergence of a
diametrically opposite position that introduces a new voice to the entire
debate. Labelled indigenous sociology and recently recast as a project of
constructing endogenous (Adesina 2006) and autonomous (Alatas 2006)
sociologies and as transmodernity (Dussel 2000), it elaborates a new epis-
temic position on the discipline, some of which is incorporated in
Raewyn Connell’s (2007) book Southern Theory. Endogenous sociolo-
gists in Africa, Asia, and Latin America have argued for a need to exca-
vate indigenous philosophies, epistemologies, and methodologies to con-
ceptualise, understand, and examine “local” and national cultures and
structures in the various countries of the South (Alatas 1974).
The key issue here is colonialism and the imposition of Western sci-
ence, theories, and methodologies in assessing non-Western societies.
Scholars in the rest of the world have argued that the univerzalisation of
European and American perspectives provided one grand vision and a
“truth” assessing changes taking place in the world (Wallerstein 2006).
Syed Hussain Alatas (1972) calls it the captive mind, “an uncritical imita-
tion of scientific intellectual activity including problem setting, analysis,
abstraction, generalisation, conceptualisation, description, explanation,
and interpretation” (11-12).
Indigenous positions have suggested that European and American
perspectives were ethnocentric and obfuscated the analysis of specific
contexts and processes, refracting, misrepresenting, and simultaneously
defining one particular way of evaluating them (Alatas 1974; Mukerji and
Sengupta 2004). This was not only true of conservative and positivist
theories but also radical theories such as Marxism and those representing
subaltern and excluded voices, such as environmentalism and feminism
(Mohanty 1988; Mani 1990). As these have been exported to other coun-
tries, they too have become dominant universal models.
No wonder, it is argued, the idea that there is very little in these non-
Western societies and regions in terms of new conceptual and explana-
tory theories, and the suggestion that until there is we cannot seriously
consider these sociologies as relevant, reconstituted domination in new
ways. The Indian sociologists Radha Kamal Mukerjee and D. P. Mukerji
thus suggested that social sciences should be seen as a unified discipline

that is culture-specific and that integrates values with analysis; they de-
manded that Indian values define the way sociological thinking in India
be construed (Mukerjee 1955; Mukerji 1958). The same assessment
structures Akiwowo’s (1987; 1990) demand for indigenous sociologies,
to which end he elaborated a conceptual scheme for assessing sociologi-
cal studies based on ideas and notions of African poetry.
This perspective also affirmed the need for the nation-state (now in a
different sense) to remain a critical locale for the classification and as-
sessment of a range of sociological practices, including social theories.
Additionally, there was a call to go beyond the nation-state in search of
the supra-local, which could be the locale for new practices to be con-
strued - especially in the case of large nation-states such as China and
India. Indigenous sociologists have highlighted Western domination in
an array of sociological practices, including those that dealt with teaching,
such as importing syllabi, textbooks, and research (what to study, how to
study, and what are considered best practices of research, including the
evaluation of research projects and protocols of writing and presenting
empirical and theoretical articles in journals) (Alatas 1974).
These issues, together with a discussion on who funds research and
who defines its agenda, opened up for debate the way social theory and
its practices are embedded in the uneven distribution of global power, an
issue of significance in the context of contemporary globalization. The
argument here is that the discipline needs to be defined by the entire set
of practices that structure its organisation, rather than merely the theories.
These practices are unevenly organised across the globe, and their exami-
nation would lead us to assess the colonial construction of modernity.
This is the resource from which it is possible to draw out the many ways
of thinking and analysing contemporary, uneven, global processes.
These dimensions are explored in a radical epistemic critique emerg-
ing from the neo-dependency school of Latin America. Theorists such as
Anibal Quijano, Enrique Dussel, and Walter Mignolo have elaborated
this position, arguing that universalization inherent in sociological theory
is part of the geopolitics of knowledge. The key to this process is an as-
sessment of modernity and its relationship to social theory. For instance,
Dussel (2000) argues:
If one understands Europe’s modernity - a long process of five centuries

- as the unfolding of new possibilities derived from its centrality in
world history and the corollary constitution of all other cultures as its
periphery, it becomes clear that, even though all cultures are ethnocen-
tric, modern European ethnocentrism is the only one that might pretend
54 Sujata Patel
to claim universality for itself. Modernity’s Eurocentrism lies in the

confusion between abstract universality and the concrete world hegem-
ony derived from Europe’s position as the center. (471)
Dussel and Quijano see a need to examine sociological knowledge as

a discourse of power, particularly in the context of contemporary devel-
opments. They propose that both classical and contemporary European
theories, and now American social theory, need to be assessed as dis-
courses of power. They contend that this theory is premised on assessing
itself, the “I” (the West), rather than the “Other” (the rest of the world),
which was and remains the object of its control, even after the formal
demise of colonialism and imperialism. Universalism implies legitimat-
ing the knowledge of the “I” regarding “society” (Mignolo 2002).
European and American social theories, they argue, incorporate a set
of axioms to frame knowledge of society and consist of several features,
which come together in terms of binaries to become a matrix of power
and a principle and a strategy of control and domination. These scholars
contend that this discourse has universalized the precepts of European
and American modernity (as part of the imperialist project), disallowing
legitimacy for new ways of thinking, of assessing processes in the rest of
the world and unearthing its tradition(s) of philosophies and epistemolo-
gies together with its specific practices. They argue for a need to study
not only sociological theories but the entire range of practices of produc-
tion and reproduction of sociological knowledge within nation-states and
regions. These have to be examined in terms of their organic links with
the dominant discourse, with each of such reflections indicating diverse-
universal ways of understanding these symbiotic linkages (Quijano 2000;
Lander 2002; Mignolo 2002).
Obviously, sociological theories, (systems of interrelated concepts,
categories, and modes of explanation that are designed to make sense of
the world) are enmeshed in normative projects (systems of thoughts and
beliefs concerned with a way of improving society). Sometimes these
normative projects are explicitly stated, but often they’re implicitly ar-
gued. These normative projects are projects of power associated with
imperialism (Connell 2006; Patel 2006; Wallerstein 1996).
Critical and reflexive sociology has been the first to initiate a discus-
sion on the symbiotic relationship between knowledge and power, includ-
ing its own. But, as indicated above, the relationship between knowledge
and power needs to be examined not only in terms of theories but in
terms of an entire range of practices. Today, globalization is also reor-
ganizing knowledge and its institutions in new and seminal ways. Can
we delineate the way this process is affecting the nature of sociological
knowledge? How is power and domination in its complex, colonial, neo-

colonial, patriarchal, discursive, national, and material manifestations
affecting epistemology, its claim to truth, and its strategies of representa-
tion? Whose ideas and perspectives is it reflecting when it enumerates
the nature and content of consequences of globalization? What is the re-
lationship between national, regional, and global knowledges?
Dussel (2000) and Quijano (2000) suggest a need to construct “a
worldwide ethical liberation project” in which alterity can be fulfilled
through a creation of new knowledge where modernity and its denied
alterity, its victims, would mutually fulfill each other in an imaginative
process. Transcending the coloniality of power and embracing transmod-
ernity is a project of mutual fulfillment of solidarity of center/periphery,
woman/man, mankind/earth, Western culture/peripheral postcolonial cul-
tures, different races, different ethnicities, and different classes. Can we
fulfill this project at ontological, methodological, and theoretical levels?
***
Below, I present some steps that allow such a project to be initiated. For
long, the criticism against dominant knowledges has been dismissed in
terms of relativism and/or ethnocentrism. Borrowing from Taylor, I ar-
gue that there is a need for accepting a cultural theory of modernity
(rather than an acultural theory) and that this can be constructed from
many sites and in many locations and through many positions. Our goal
should be to debate the various ways in which power has shaped and con-
tinues to shape the practices of sociological knowledge across the world.
Our objective is to create a discussion on how to assess all aspects of the
discipline organized and institutionalized across the globe: ideas and
theories, scholars and scholarship, practices and traditions, ruptures and
continuities through a globalising perspective that examines the relation-
ship between sociological knowledge and power.
Given that the relationship between knowledge and power may be
structured in distinct ways across the world and within nation-states, there
is a need to examine the resources of the discipline at three levels. First,
disciplinary traditions need to be studied from multiple spatial locations:
within localities, within nation-states, within regions and the globe. How-
ever, the nation-state is a key element in fashioning the traditions of the
discipline. The nation-state defines sociological traditions in many ways.
It does so directly. Whether democratic, authoritarian, fascist, social-
ist, or theocratic, it plays a critical role in legitimising the need for the
discipline and framing its function for society. Democracies have gener-
56 Sujata Patel
ally encouraged the teaching of sociology; this is not so for states that
have propagated fascism, communism, theocracy, apartheid, and military
dictatorships. These have, instead, barred it and/or controlled its teaching.
In countries where the subject is not proscribed, the nation-state can
intervene in myriad ways, including when private institutions play a di-
rect role. It does this by determining the content of knowledge to be
transmitted to learners and through a gamut of policies and regulations on
higher education, which both encourage and constrain the development of
the discipline. These policies determine the protocols and practices of
teaching and learning processes, the establishment and practices of re-
search within research institutes, the distribution of grants for research,
the language of reflection, the organization of the profession, and the
definitions of scholars and scholarship.
These different disciplinary traditions are best understood if per-
ceived as being organized within the nation-state after the Second World
War, though there also exist traditions in terms of language communities.
However, the former provides the most significant spatial and political
locale to assess this history together with the evaluation of the many con-
tradictions and contestations that have defined the organic linkages be-
tween these tradition(s). Sociological knowledge, this paper argues, is
imbricated in the identity of the nation-state and within its politics.
It is also significant to argue, following Smith, Giddens, and Beck
(mentioned above), that the resources of the discipline need to be seen
from above and below the nation-state. For instance, space in the form of
locality remains a key category for structuring the resources of the disci-
pline. But, these necessarily remain uneven and provincial. Thus, within
each nation-state, one can assess the many starting points, many
achievements, many failures, and many continuities and discontinuities.
These ups and downs dealing with the organization, consolidation, and
institutionalization of sociological traditions involve confrontations be-
tween dominant universal traditions and newly emerging subaltern ones.
In this sense there is and will be diversity of sociological traditions within
nation-states.
These diversities exist not only within nation-states but also between
them. Because the histories of sociological traditions in nation-states are
differently constituted, the collective experience of growth and the spread
of sociological traditions across the world is and remains diverse and un-
evenly organized. This unevenness is related to the relationship of each
tradition with that of Europe and later of the USA and relates to the way
these traditions came to be universalized across the world.
Universalization of the North Atlantic tradition(s) is associated with
the global distribution of power (Wallerstein 2006). In this sense, this
paper attempts to move beyond the binaries of universalism versus rela-

tivism/particularism to posit a third position which suggests that socio-
logical traditions are both universal and diverse. It argues that the claims
of each of the traditions of sociological knowledge are distinct and uni-
versal, but together these are not equivalent but remain plural, multiple,
hybrid, or relative-positing claims based on criteria internal to each of
these tradition(s) (Chakrabarty 2008).
Second, traditions need to be discussed in terms of their sociological
moorings in distinct philosophies, epistemologies, theoretical frames, cul-
tures of science, and languages of reflection. These need to be explored
to assess how, at various points of time in the history of the discipline,
new perspectives on understanding social life have emerged by question-
ing dominant universalized and colonized sociological ideas. There is
also a need to examine how the discipline has evolved to incorporate sub-
altern voices and use these voices in order to understand, assess, and
comprehend evolving sociabilities. They also highlight how external and
dominant processes, together with colonialism and neo-colonialism, have
reframed knowledge, and they assert a need to excavate new endogenous
and/or autonomous ways of thinking and of practicing sociology.
Third, the intellectual moorings of sociological practices are exten-
sive. There are diverse and comparative sites of knowledge production
and its transmission. These range from campaigns, movements, and ad-
vocacies to classrooms and departments to syllabi formulations and pro-
tocols of evaluating journal articles and books. They involve activists,
scholars, and communities in assessing, reflecting, and elucidating imme-
diate events and issues that define the research process; in organizing and
systematizing knowledge of the discipline; and in long-term, institutional-
ized processes for organizing the teaching process.
Together, these diversities cannot be placed in a single line and con-
sidered equal; neither are these superior or inferior. Collectively, they are
and remain both diverse and universal sociological traditions, because
they present distinct and different perspectives to assess their own histo-
ries of sociological theories and practices. Each of these traditions has
also evolved its own assessment of its relationship with other traditions
and with the accumulation of sociological knowledge and power. In this
sense, different traditions’ perspectives remain diverse and comparative.
This is so for two reasons:
First, they are diverse because each tradition makes its own assess-
ment of how it is structured within the global distribution of ideas, schol-
ars, and scholarship (whether these are adapted from imports or are stated
to be indigenous/endogenous/local/national/ provincial); how these relate
to its contexts, including the culture of teaching and research, institutions,
58 Sujata Patel
the state, and the economy. While these claims are universal, the inter-
pretations of how these are interconnected with the North Atlantic tradi-
tion(s) and with each other remain different for each nation-state. Or, to
put it in other words, what is distinct is how each tradition has contested
the claims of those from the North Atlantic and evolved its own internal
assessment of this relationship. In this sense, collectively, sociological
traditions can be stated to be diversely universal or incorporating “diver-
sality” (Mignolo 2002: 89).
Second, following from the above, we can suggest that sociology was
globalized from the moment of its birth with the assertion of the singular-
ity of the process of modernity through the universalization of European
and later the American provincial experience(s) (Chakrabarty 2000). A
discourse of power structured universalization of knowledge regarding
sociabilities. In this sense, while globalization has been debated to be a
recent process, globalization of sociological knowledge has had a longer
history.
This globalization has sometimes erased earlier histories of moderni-
ties, reinterpreting these and displaced ways of thinking, being, and living.
As a result, some tradition(s) have not evolved perspectives and theories
to assess their relationships with dominant, universalized traditions,
though the latter have been recognized. Others have adapted to external
and dominant ideas. Yet, others have made a critique of the legacy of
dependence and domination to assess and to reflect on their own moder-
nities. If globalization of sociological knowledge has “silenced” the for-
mation of many voices in certain regions and nation-states, it has also
challenged the West by asking new questions and provided novel answers
from other arenas. These energies need to be coalesced in a strong intra-
and internationalized network of communication that transcends the
above mentioned multiple matrices of inequalities. Working from the
margins of all borders can help to provide a new identity. The creative
and imaginative use of these resources continues to remain the most sig-
nificant challenge of the day.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adesina, J. “Sociology Beyond Despair: Recovery of Nerve, Endogene-

ity, and Epistemic Intervention.” South African Review 37, no. 2
(2006): 241-259.
Akiwowo, A. “Building National Sociological Tradition in an African
Subregion.” In National Traditions in Sociology, edited by N. Genov,
pp. 151-166. London: Sage, 1987.
-----. “Contributions to the Sociology of Knowledge from an African

Oral Poetry.” In Globalisation, Knowledge, and Society: Readings
from International Sociology, edited by M. Albrow and E. King, pp.
103-118. London: Sage, 1990.
Alatas, H. “The Captive Mind and Creative Development.” Interna-
tional Social Science Journal 36, no. 4 (1974): 691-9.
Alatas, F. Alternative Discourses in Asian Social Science: Responses To
Eurocentrism. Delhi: Sage, 2006.
Albrow, M. “Sociology for One World.” International Sociology 2, no.
1 (1987): 1-12.
-----. Cosmopolitan Vision. Cambridge: Polity, 2006.
Chakrabarty, D. Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and His-
torical Difference Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Connell, R. Southern Theory: The Global Dynamics of Knowledge in
Social Sciences. Cambridge: Polity, 2007.
-----. “In Defense of Provincializing Europe: A Response to Carola
Dietze.” History and Theory 47 (February 2008): 85-96.
Dussel, E. “Europe, Modernity, and Eurocentrism.” Nepantla: Views
from South 1, no. 3 (2000): 465-478.
Giddens, A. The Consequences of Modernity. California: Stanford Uni-
versity Press, 1990.
Giddens, A. and J. Turner, eds. Social Theory Today. Cambridge: Polity
Press, 1987.
Gouldner, A. The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology. New York: Ba-
sic Books, 1971.
Habermas, J. The Postnational Constellation: Political Essays. Cam-
bridge: Polity, 2001.
Lander, E. “Eurocentrism, Modern Knowledges, and the ‘Natural’ Order
of Global Capital.” Nepantla: Views from the South 3, no. 2 (2002):
249-268.
Mani, L. “Multiple Mediations: Feminist Scholarship in the Age of
Multinational Reception.” Feminist Review 35 (Summer 1990): 24-
41.
Mignolo, W. D. “The Geopolitics of Knowledge and the Colonial Dif-
ference.” The South Atlantic Quarterly 101, no. 1 (Winter 2002): 57-
96
Mohanty, C. “Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial
Discourses.” Feminist Review 30 (Autumn 1988): 61-88.
Mukerjee, R. “A General Theory of Society.” In The Frontiers of Social
Science: in Honour of Radhakamal Mukerjee, edited by B. Singh.
London: Macmillan, 1955.
60 Sujata Patel
Mukerji, D. P. Diversities: Essays in Economics, Sociology, and Other

Social Problems. New Delhi: People’s Publishing House, 1958.
Mukherji, P. N. and C. Sengupta, eds. Indigeneity and Universality in
Social Science: A South Asian Response. Sage: New Delhi, 2004.
Patel, S. “Beyond Binaries: A Case for Self-Reflexive Sociologies.”
Current Sociology 54, no. 3 (2006): 381–395.
Quijano, A. “Coloniality of Power, Eurocentricism, and Latin America.”
Nepantla: Views from the South 1 (2000): 553-800.
Smelser, N. (1994) “Sociology as Science, Humanism, and Art.” La
Revue Tocqueville 15, no. 1 (1994): 5-18.
Smith, A. “Nationalism: A Trend Report and an Annotated Bibliogra-
phy.” Current Sociology 21, no. 3 (1973).
Taylor, C. “Two Theories of Modernity.” The Hastings Center Report
25, no. 2 (Mar - Apr 1995): 24-33.
Wallerstein, I. Open Social Sciences. Delhi: Vistaar, 1996.
-----. European Universalism: The Rhetoric of Power. New York: The
New Press, 2006.
PART II:
LATIN AMERICA
Revitalizing the Sociological View in Latin America 63
Revitalizing the Sociological View

in Latin America
Marcos Supervielle, Universidad de la República Oriental del
Uruguay, Uruguay
Latin American sociology, like the sociologies of all the non-hegemonic

regions, has become entangled, with time, within the typical debates
about the pertinence of theories and models that it uses to analyze its so-
ciety.
Indeed, the categories with which this sociology pretends to analyze
society, in general terms, were created to describe central societies: the
German, the English, the French or the American ones, and therefore they
are only relevant to analyze our society by means of analogy. This par-
ticularity takes us to the endless discussion of the validity of these catego-
ries of analysis or their heuristic performance. They have even been criti-
cized because their being “imported” deforms reality, generating negative
consequences, since they lead the investigation or reflection towards shal-
low conclusions or even worse, lend support to the wrong political agen-
das, incomplete or ill-intentioned in solving our society’s problems and
predicting their future projection.
This situation is certainly not new in Latin America. In 1900, Latin
American scholars recommended the adoption of European categories,
but only after a critical analysis so as to discard the useless ones. In some
cases, they criticized harshly those who strayed from the real problems of
our society and who were dazzled by European theorizations. This daz-
zling, which some have called “cultural colonialism” (Roitman 2008),
still has some validity and important negative consequences for the pro-
duction of sociological knowledge in our continent. This is notorious in
two different ways.
First, there is a certain inferiority complex in knowledge production,
which is overcome in certain periods of our recent history, but which we
still continue to confront. Second, as a reaction to such “cultural colonial-
ism”, a kind of naïve nationalism has emerged which pretends to deny all
contributions from outside Latin America, or at least to ignore them. It is
also fashionable to denounce the sociological or intellectual “trends” in
general. But the paradox is that the denunciation of these so-called alien-
64 Marcos Supervielle
ating categories is carried out in defense of imported categories them-

selves, but which conform to the standards of the dominant “establish-
ment” of the Social Sciences and therefore become an alleged universal
pattern.
One possible outlook of the Latin American sociology is to observe
its maturity, from the point of view of its autonomization from the center,
that is, from European and North American sociologies. But this would
deny the impact—positive or otherwise—that European concepts have
had on the changed orientation. In our continent, the big educational re-
forms and the laicism and gratuity principles were inspired by the positiv-
ist ideas of Compte and Spencer. Contemporary European ideas of the
time exerted a big influence on past Latin American sociology, especially
in overcoming the fundamentally catholic “spiritualism”, which tended to
support and legitimate very unequal structures within our societies.
Therefore, one of the characteristics of the Latin American sociology
is that it did not develop general theories or analytic models for our own
society until very recently. To the reasons provided above, we must add
that the development and evolution of this sociology has been very
closely related to political, economic and social situations. Ours is argua-
bly the continent where most high level politicians, such as presidents
and secretaries of state have been sociologists with important academic
careers. This implies a strong relationship between the social sciences and
the political juncture, a situation which has benefited sociology under
certain circumstances, but has weakened it seriously under others. As a
consequence, the production of the sociology in Latin America is not the
creation of big theoretical systems, but of categories of relevance as to the
orientation of the social and political action. Categories, or concepts, such
as periphery, dependency, structural heterogeneity, domestic colonialism,
differentiated styles, marginal mass and informality, among others are an
example of the original focus on our societies.
Mindful of the disadvantages generated by this “cultural colonialism”
and the lack of autonomy generated by historical circumstances, and also
of the consequent immaturity of its sociological production, we think it is
paramount to question ourselves about the function of sociological
knowledge in Latin America and the conditions of its production in each
historical era; the factors that modified its demand and generated new
uses for it; and its uses today and the reasons why we see the possibility
for a new development of sociology in this historical moment.
The post-war Latin American sociology may be divided into the fol-
lowing periods.
• In the first period, there is a sociology of modernization that is closely

tied to the theories of Latin American economic development.
• A second period characterized by the emergence of theories of de-
pendency and exploitation, that are critical of the sociology of mod-
ernization and economic theories of development, coincide with the
initial phase of the Latin American dictatorship.
• As dictatorships spread to almost the entire continent, the third
phase is characterized by an ebbing in the the importance and vital-
ity of sociology in its opposition to the expansion of the neoliberal
philosophy and economics, the latter which are almost taking over
the entire “room” of the social sciences. But at the same time, just as
the dependency theory runs out of steam (or almost does), a profes-
sional and specialized sociology appears. And in the last phases of
the dictatorships, a sociology of the résistance develops.
• In the fourth and last phase, after the exhaustion of neoliberal theo-
ries, the re-democratizations of all the Latin American states, and
increased popular participation through social movements, we find a
re-valorization of sociology and a rediscovery of the possibilities to
contribute to emancipatory mega-tales. We witness a re-evaluation
of anti-dependent-on-the-hegemonic-countries sociology. European
categories of modernization are revised in an effort to create the
foundations for a sociology that overcomes domestic colonialism,
that focuses on the development of social movements as the carriers
of social change, and that is oriented to aiding the creation of a sus-
tainable production system. And finally, we see the expansion of a
professional and/or specialized sociology but now it is framed
around a search for the reduction of social inequalities and in de-
fense of social, civil, and politic rights of our societies.
SOCIOLOGY OF THE POST-WAR MODERNIZATION
Both World War II and the Korean War benefited the Latin American
economies in that the “commodities” produced on our continent reached
extraordinarily high prices and our industries bloomed while in the cen-
tral countries production had become war-related.
This very favorable context foretold a very optimistic, European-like
future: that our continent evolution was supposed to hinge on its indus-
trial development. This industrial and economic bonanza was also sup-
posed to go hand-in-hand with a liberal and democratic society.
This outlook was advocated by Latin American economists such as
Prebisch and Furtado. The former was a great economic development
theoretician and the first general secretary of CEPAL (Latin Americal

Economy Comission) that was created in 1947 under the U.N. system.
From the start, Prebisch called for the contribution of sociologists to ex-
pand on and enrich the economic development analysis of Latin America.
From this original approach, sociology was asked to report on the po-
tential of diverse social elements in order to generate the development of
Latin American countries. With this goal in mind, the sociology built di-
chotomous categories (traditional-modern, dual societies, etc.) which,
although they evolved with time, never totally abandoned their original
matrix.
In this first phase of modern Latin American sociology, which lasted
until the mid-sixties, our sociology evolved from the dominant feudal-
bourgeois category at first, with clear European connotations, to an oli-
garchy-national bourgeoisie category later, which focused on the potenti-
alities of the dominant classes for the development of our societies, to
finally a broader category of the traditional society-modern society.
This is not merely a nominal evolution; the transformation of one
category into another entailed important conceptual changes, particularly
because such transformation were the result of a increasingly complex
analysis that evolved from the analysis of the dominant classes to one
about all classes within society, including everyone in the analysis of
such development. But it was always, or almost always, circumscribed
within an analysis that presupposed the transferring from a backwards
nucleus to a modern one. At the time, there was talk of “developing” so-
cieties. The measuring yardstick, the ideal standard, was always a devel-
oped hub, and all the negative attributes and impediments were found in
the backwards, traditional or underdeveloped ones. This analytical strat-
egy always started from a more specific definition of the developed hubs,
the modern or developed one, attributing all negative or contradictory
attributes to the backwards, traditional or underdeveloped one.
But the really original contribution to Latin American sociology at
the time was the role assigned to political activities in such a process of
development. Medina Echeverría (1980), sociologist and Prebisch’s main
collaborator at the CEPAL, assigned a particular relevance to political
participation during the transition process from underdevelopment to de-
velopment, because of the peripherical situation of our continent. It be-
came obvious to them that it was necessary to achieve development
through political activities so as to overcome the shortcomings of an
area’s peripherical situation; there was also a discussion about the differ-
ent development styles engendered by different political systems (Graci-
arena 1967). At the same time, sociology was given the task to analyze
the role of social classes in their development but not in their involve-
ment with class struggles, which was practically a non-existent subject in

academic contexts as well as in the CEPAL at the time.
Investigations were then carried out in order to find out the capability
of the different social classes to participate in the development process.
Fernando Enrique Cardoso conducted important research about the “Cap-
tains of Industry” (1964) and Alain Touraine and Torcuato Di Tella (1967)
inaugurated sociological investigations with research on mining workers.
Their findings on two mining endeavors show that those miners were in
the middle of an industrial transition process, from a closed society to an
open one, from a traditional enterprise to a modern one (Abramo and
Montero 2000). Research by Nun about the most “excluded” segments of
society allowed him to elaborate on the concept of “marginal mass” as
opposed to “marginality,” fashionable at the time, to describe a non-
integrated sector of society and in order to point out that in Latin America
not all “marginal masses” automatically became the “industrial reserve
army” in the Marxist sense (2001). With this definition, Nun set the limits
of who would participate in the transition to development and who would
be excluded.
Social Development in the Post-War Latin America is the book that
best reflects the sociological thinking of that era (CEPAL 1963). Al-
though not mentioned by name in this official book, all its authors were
sociologists. This book highlights the social problems of the time.
• There is rapid urbanization and social concentration in big cities,

without a corresponding agricultural growth, but with a consistent
country to city migration instead.
• Countryside marginality was a result of stratification and production
in ranches, and hence created a very poor quality of life and very
low political participation among workers.
• The authors acknowledge the naiveté of previous CEPAL analyses
in which erasing the original hub was estimated to be a relatively
easy task. Rather, they argue that such traditional societies appar-
ently “have a flexible quality, capable of absorbing extremely ra-
tional elements, without losing its original physiognomy” (7).
• The book also points out that such flexibility of the “traditional
structure” has been supported by the domination of patron-client re-
lationships, but that as a mechanism it might be worn out by abuse
and demographic pressure; it also reaffirms that the prevalence of
patron-client relationships is incompatible with modern pluralist
democracies with economic support on industrial organization.
• The authors also find that the flexibility of the traditional structures
had partially absorbed the middle classes, which had been assigned
a central role in “creative activity” as a source of change. This ab-

sorption had hence reduced the capacity for change.
• Within the most popular classes, the authors remark on the rele-
vance of unions, which did not follow European models. They also
note the marginality of some urban social layers and even “danger-
ous areas” of the “mass situations” of some excluded or badly in-
cluded sectors.
• Finally, on a more conceptual plane, the authors argue that the dy-
namics of the traditional structures created “protoforms” of ideolo-
gies with ambiguous formulations, “soaked” with irrational ele-
ments, and that reflected the critical situation of the domination by
clienteles and the situation of “massification” brought about by
demographic pressure and fast urbanization. In other words, they
emphasize the assimilation capability of the persistent traditional
society.
Latin American sociology, with its findings, did not question the
categories it adopted from European and North American theories, but its
conclusions tended to show that the evolution of societies in the central
countries did not follow the same course as in Latin America. Because of
its peripherical situation and certain resilience of the traditional sector,
these evolutions follow a very different course in Latin America.
Beyond that, the sociology practiced after World War II had progres-
sive and democratic connotations, so that sociologists of this generation,
their pupils, and their science were labeled as progressive or left-wing.
This had consequences for the discipline’s consequent development.
SOCIOLOGY OF DEPENDENCE AND EXPLOITATION
Historic events such as the Cuban revolution of 1958 and the coup d’état
in Brazil, which initiated a cycle of coup d’états in Latin America, even-
tually exhausted the previous theoretical model and contributed to the
onset of the second period of the Latin American sociology. In addition,
the second Ecumenical Council was of great influence on this new period,
as it directed liberation theology and revitalized important Catholic
scholars. These events influenced the new generations of sociologists in
particular and Latin American intellectual activity in general since it in-
corporated revolution or at least a radical possibility for change within the
horizon of Latin American development. But above all, it transferred the
blame for the obstacles to development from the backwardness of our
societies, to the dependency of our peripherical situation on the hege-

monic centers of world capitalism.
Dependency theory opened up perhaps the more notorious period of
sociology in Latin America. Simultaneously, other theories appeared. In
Mexico, Gonzalez Casanova produced his theory of exploitation, an al-
ternative to the theory of development. And, while dictatorships spread
throughout Latin America, a specialized professional sociology devel-
oped providing information that was instrumental in making decisions
about social policies, as well as a sociological research, intended to de-
termine the resilient capabilities of the dictatorships.
Meanwhile, both the Cuban revolution and the Brazilian dictatorship
incorporated the concept of process “rupture” and radical directional
change, unknown in the previous period. But the latter produced an im-
portant impact in that it caused a migration of sociologists, some of
whom ended up in Chile, the location of CEPAL headquarters. Chile ap-
peared as a very liberal country at the time, energized by an important
growth in the political left-wing, which eventually produced the election
of the first socialist government through free elections in the continent,
that of Víctor Allende.
The Brazilian dictatorship experience plus a certain euphoria related
to the possibilities of progressive political changes in Chile, produced a
strong skepticism as to: first, the possibilities of change by simply over-
coming our backwards problems and, second, the removal of certain so-
cial structures that the following of the center-European models was gen-
erating. The ambiguity of the political climate, increasingly authoritarian,
together with a strong hope of radical change, although with a wide range
of hues, created the conditions for a different sociological reflection: the
main task with regards to our development was not to overcome the most
backward hub of the Latin American societies but rather, to overcome its
dependency on the hegemonic centers of capitalism. Further, this depend-
ency did not stop at our borders.
In 1967, the book Development and Dependency in Latin America by
Cardoso and Faletto, the former a Brazilian, the latter a Chilean, was pub-
lished. The book expounded on several theses:
• First, that it is necessary to differentiate between underdeveloped

countries and those, increasingly less, which lack development
completely and which have no commercial relationships with indus-
trialized countries. Further, the authors argue that it’s important to
differentiate out the diverse kinds of underdevelopment, according
to the particular kind of relationship these societies forge with in-
dustrialized countries. The concept of dependency refers to “the
conditions of existence and functioning of the economy and political

systems, showing the relationship between the two, within the inter-
nal sphere as well as on the external” (38).
• This category-dependency is therefore different from center-
periphery, because the latter only underlines the role of underdevel-
oped economies in the global market.
• The analysis of the “dependency situation,” within the Latin Ameri-
can development context, means to highlight the definite and di-
verse interrelationships between and among the different social
groups, as well as the activity of forces, groups, and institutions with
a decisive role in development. This is because, for these authors,
there is no metaphysical relationship of dependency; rather it is pro-
duced by an interest and co-action network that relates some social
groups with others, and particularly, some social classes to others.
The subsequent popularization and abuse of the concept of depend-

ency led to its misuse. Therefore the original authors found themselves
forced to find specifications as to its epistemological status. For instance,
they pointed out that dependency did not have the same status as the cen-
tral categories of analysis of capitalism such a plusvalía, acumulation, etc.
(Cardoso 1978). The concept, not restricted to the political and economic
spheres, was on occasion even applied to cultural or religious contexts
(Ianni 1969). But the biggest criticism of the theory of dependency was
that the “internal-external” relationship to which it necessarily refers,
makes what happens in the dependent country appear as an automatic
result of what happens in the hegemonic country of reference, a theoreti-
cally very poor and empirically false conceptualization (Cueva 1979).
Another criticism pointed at the existence of an external dependency and
an internal one in the theoreticians of the dependency, and argued that
therefore the analysis oscilates between a national “focus” (external de-
pendency) and a class focus (internal dependency), and that in general
terms, the external dependency received more attention (Weffort 1994).
Some took this criticism to a more radical level, arguing that the theory of
dependency does not include a class analysis (Cueva 1979).
Alongside the theory of dependency, as a result of political circum-
stances and intellectual exchanges in South America and in Mexico, an-
other sociological intellectual production center, González Casanova pro-
duced the theory of exploitation in 1976. It also comes across as yet an-
other criticism of the theory of development and modernization, and also
explicitly a criticism of the theory of dependency, although it recognizes
some merit in it. This theory mostly highlights the domestic relashion-
ships within national states.
The main theses of the theory of exploitation can be summarized as

follows:
• Neither equality, freedom nor progress are values located beyond

exploitation, but rather are characteristics or properties of it instead
since inequality, power, and development are part of the exploita-
tion relationship.
• Unlike in the past, the class struggle has been mediatized so that ex-
ploitation no longer has direct effects on class struggle. For this rea-
son it is necessary to demonstrate that exploitation is not an excep-
tional event but that it permeates the world system and affects its
behavior. It is therefore the main category in this analysis.
• Relationships of exploitation may be classified into exploitation of
classes and exploitation of regions, and both may vary in weight and
overlap with each other. Class-based exploitation, as a general cate-
gory, takes the historical forms inspired by classical Marxism:
slavery, feudalism, capitalism, and neocapitalism. Regional
exploitation, as a general category, includes the countryside-city
exploitation, colonial exploitation, imperialism exploitation, and
domestic colonialism.
• In the case of Mexico, domestic colonialism is the analysis of the
native American problem. More broadly, it focuses on the social re-
lationships of domination and exploitation among heterogeneous
cultural groups. Generally, when using the frameworks of colonial-
ism or semicolonialism, it is in reference to Mexican relationships
with the metropolis or foreign powers, but the indigenous popula-
tions are victims of domestic colonialism, turning Mexico (and by
extension others nations in the continent) into colonizer and colo-
nized, without being aware of it.
• The colonial structure and domestic colonialism differ from the
class structure because they are not only forms of domination and
exploitation of the workers but also of an entire population (com-
prised of diverse classes) by another population.
These theories were more or less influenced by Marxism, which at

the time entered the academic center, becoming a general frame of refer-
ence. Nevertheless, the theory of dependency was not clearly Marxist and
the theory of exploitation drew from the Marxist category but incorpo-
rated connotations which transcended it and turned it into something dif-
ferent.
The fading of relevance of the theory of dependency and of the the-
ory of exploitation within Latin American sociology had more to do with
a new culture of the social sciences gaining ground in the region, than
with the theories’ inconsistencies or inability to account for the reality
that it pretended to describe. Together with and driven by the growth of
dictatorships in the south of the continent, neoliberal theory advanced as
the dominant culture in reference to the economy, society, modernization,
and development and later, in a second instance became the hegemonic
continental culture.
THE SOCIOLOGY DURING

THE MILITARY DISCTATORSHIPS
This hegemonization process of the neoliberal culture within the social

sciences and in decision-making centers caused a deep change in the ori-
entation of the dominant economics in Latin America. It changed the re-
flection of the development subjects focus among Prebisch and Furtado’s
followers. And therefore, it changed radically the relarionship between
sociology and economics. With its new paradigm, sociology did not feel
the need to dwell on the analysis of social development, which became
completely forsaken by international organizations There was never an-
other book published, like in the sixties, about social development that
focused on theories and sociological problems, neither by CEPAL nor by
any other international organization.
Sociology became increasingly excluded from all public policy and
particularly from all development discussions. The impact of neoliberal
economic theory that accompanied the dictatorships and later permeated
the emerging Latin American democracies erradicated all reflection on
class struggles. Classes themselves were no longer referenced in explana-
tions. Analysis in economic terms of center-periphery and the deteriora-
tion of exchange terms became less relevant. By privileging the market,
the historical and cultural dimension of development no longer received
attention and gradually collective units of analysis were replaced by a
focus on individual rationalities and rights.
On a different plane and as a background to future sociological activ-
ity, the market became the main regulator of the economy and hence, of
society. It became a priority for the state to withdraw all forms of social
protection without providing any alternative safety net, and through in-
creasing privatization, the role of the state in the economy was drastically
reduced.
Paradoxically, this process of “withdrawal of the state” from the so-
cial and economic activities took place during the dictatorships and with
support from the military, a sector of the state. But even after the fall of
dictatorships in the eighties, this trend did not reverse and in fact became
even stronger, because it was compatible with the emerging democracies.
During the dictatorships, sociologists were the target of strong repres-
sion. A few scientists, who had gained notoriety at a very young age,
shunned professional practice to join the guerrillas, such as Camilo Tor-
res in Colombia. Others immigrated either to Europe or to other Latin
American countries that were unaffected by military governments, in-
cluding Mexico and Venezuela, where they were able to continue work-
ing in their profession. Universities located in countries that had dictator-
ships either cancelled or drastically reduced instruction in sociology. So-
ciologists and other social scientists were displaced from their traditional
posts at national and international institutions and culturally suppressed.
In this very negative context, sociologists changed the focus and orienta-
tion of their profession, in order to survive.
Sociologists’ labored re-insertion took mainly three main directions.
First, a great number of them took technical jobs in countries under dicta-
torships. Second, because sociologists had incorporated social and statis-
tical research into their working methodology in the past, and had accu-
mulated experience in conducting and organizing surveys, they used this
fact to their advantage. Since diverse national and international operators,
both in the public and private domain, demanded additional statistical
information, a specific market for professional sociology appeared. It was
of a very neutral nature and produced increasingly specialized descriptive
information of the most diverse social populations. Indeed, many organi-
zations of the UN system required additional information from different
socioeconomic levels in order to carry out international comparisons.
This demand generated job opportunities for college teachers in social
research private institutes. Simultaneously, nongovernmental organiza-
tions (NGOs) from Sweden, Canada, and Holland supported these institu-
tions with their research programs and which demanded stable staff. Sur-
vey-conducting companies emerged as the demand for market research
for television and radio audiences, goods and services, and later, public
opinion for electoral and other purposes grew. Third, during the period of
re-democratization, a market demand for statistics investigation units
emerged for the central administration and private enterprises. Again,
sociologists were able to seek positions in these niches.
In these new centers of knowledge, the characteristics of their sociol-
ogy allowed for a much more specific empirical knowledge of social real-
ity, but it could not describe the whole of society, nor could it predict
changes in trends or the direction of macro societal policies. These new
professional sociologies appeared as a new division of sociology within
sociology, very descriptive, supported by sophisticated quantitative
methodologies, reaching an unprecedented expansion due to the devel-

opment of informatics and its database capabilities. Even when this
knowledge was incorporated into diverse theories, they were sectorial
(education, health, job, etc.) and became reorganized under different
paradigms and sought to solve more pragmatic problems than the sociol-
ogy of modernization, development, dependency or exploitation had in-
tended. These sectorial sociologies became legitimate and justified to a
great extent, insofar as they described different kinds of populations. But
in these descriptions, they also modified their unit of analysis so that it
was no longer a social class or other form of stratification, but rather the
individual. Moreover, thanks to the informatics resources which could
account empirically for these populations, sociology gravitated towards a
focus on individuals as the informative support of society, allowing for a
dialogue with the more radical liberal postures that would accompany
liberalism.
A second area of development in sociology, which also originated
during the dictatorships of democratic regimes with a strong authoritarian
sign, was in the promotion of communities, particularly ethnic communi-
ties. Its goal was no longer a focus on macro-social or societal subjects,
but rather pointed to the defense of aboriginal cultures that were facing
the aggressive cultural integration promoted by urban centers. These cul-
tures, many of which are non-writing, used to have a strong wealth of
knowledge that entitled them to their own social models, and which they
were stripped of by the advance of occidental culture.
Scholars like Paulo Freire in Brasil or Orlando Fals Borda in Colom-
bia developed different strategies of public sociology with an ethno-
graphic character. Freire (1974) argues that
As a result of man’s relationship with reality, of being with her and

in her, because of acts of creation, recreation and decision, he dy-
namizes the world. He dominates reality, humanizing it, increasing it
with something he creates, he temporalized the geographic spaces,
creates culture. And this play of man with men, challenging and an-
swering to challenges, altering, creating, is what does not aloow for
immobility neither of society nor of culture. And while he creates, re-
creates and decides, historical eras are shaped. (34)
In this way, Freire developed a pedagogy oriented to very popular sectors

with an innovative sociological base.
Orlando Fals Borda developed the Partcipative Action Investigation
(IAP) Method (1991). For this methodology, Fals Borda leaned explicitly
on Cardoso and Faletto’s theory of dependency, as well as on Gonzalez
Casanova’s, Camilo Torres’s and Freire’s sociology of exploitation. It is

an investigation of anthropological foundations, which intends to substi-
tute the valorative neutrality with a “telos” (purpose) that implies a com-
mitment within this context of transforming a society in a direction con-
sidered inadmissible. To do it, he wishes to break the traditional relation-
ship between the investigator and the investigated group defined as sub-
ject-object and proposes a subject-subject relationship. This break with
the traditional relationship is crucial, since the author intends to build a
new society, and this break operates on a scientific level as well as in a
social one. In the domestic realm, it affects machismo in the man-woman
relationship; in education, it affects the student-teacher relationship; in
politics, it affects leader-follower relationship; in medicine, the patient-
doctor one; and generally seeks symmetrical relationships in all fields.
The second great challenge of this methodology is to recognize the popu-
lar wisdom (or popular science) which points to something that he feels
that science and traditional techniques have forgotten and forsaken; life,
feelings, joy, and everyday life. For Fals Borda, IAP eventually achieves
an encounter of both kinds of knowledge: technological, “which could be
leading us to world destruction” and popular wisdom that emphasizes
other values (19). Indeed, a new path may appear from there.
Finally, during the dictatorships, and mostly at the end of that era, a
sociology that was oriented by the opposition between democracy and
dictatorships, developed, which set the foundations for a political science
that would rapidly develop in the following years. The main focus in this
sociology of resistenceI was no longer modernity and development, but
on the capability of the popular forces to overthrow dictatorships. In work
sociology, for instance, the intention was to analyze the possibilities of
rebuilding the working-class and union movements. In Brazil, where this
trend grew most notably, the focus was on the relationship between resis-
tence and conflict, but within the political framework as opposed to one
that was concerned with modernization, as in the past (Abramo and Mon-
tero 2000).
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF
TODAY’S RE-EMERGING SOCIOLOGY
The lack of focus of the sociological production in this period, as a result

of the general conditions under the dictatorships, continued into the era of
democratization that ended the authoritarian cycle of the eighties. After
all, the transition into democracy failed to produce any changes with re-
gards to the neoliberal economic orientations or the pretension to turn
sociology into the social science of reference for all kinds of social and
economic policies. In addition to all this, the political sciences were forti-
fied by the very important and liberal concept of democracy during this
period.
The dominant theoretical-philosophical perspectives took relevance
over societal reflections and its specific dynamism as the bases for expla-
nations about the characteristics of Latin American national societies and
as results of the economic, cultural, institutional, and social policies that
these societies experience.
In spite of the weak bonds between the sociological reflection and
private and public decision-making processes, of the lack of thematic and
theoretical focus in academic centers, and waning efforts to strengthen
common Latin American theoretical production, and—perhaps as a con-
sequence of this last factor, of the growing importance attached to theo-
retical production from central countries—inspite of all this, Latin
American sociology started slowly to recover. At this time, Latin Ameri-
can states were required to carry out economic structural adjustment and
which gave way to large-scale privatization of public enterprises and the
financial crisis of the new century. These events generated social re-
sponses, movements, and demonstrations of a very wide nature which
again prompted important questions with no easy answers from an eco-
nomic or political point of view.
Growing democratization, the intent to overcome neoliberal cultural
hegemony, the dynamism of social movements struggling for democratic
freedom, and struggling to share the costs of crises and the structural ad-
justment policies with the upper classes as well as the growing participa-
tion of ethnic groups or segregated sectors in these struggles, opened up
the possibility for a renewed sociology that went back to its sources in
hopes of improving Latin American societies.
We will attempt to describe, albeit incompletely, the big trends in
Latin American sociology today, as it recovers its reflective capacities
and is again oriented by emancipatory megatales.
Today, an important theoretical reflection on the academic level has
developed that is a continuation of the center-periphery controversy. Ac-
cording to this first line of thought, there is a growing concern about
Latin America’s social and economic role in the global context, of the
economic and cultural impact which hegemonic societies have on the
continent, and its role in globalization process. In some cases, globaliza-
tion is understood as a new version of the theory of dependency or even
as the result of liberal (or liberal neo-conservative) policies (Gonzalez
Casanova 1995). Borón (2005) among others, have analyzed the impact
of neoliberal policies, the negotiations over external debt payments, and
the repercussions these have had on making the region one of the most
socially unequal places in the world, along this line of thought. From a
different perspective, but still with a focus on the external impact on
Latin America, Robles (2000) incorporates the concept of “risk” giving it
an original twist than how it was used in Europe. Robles argues that risk
marks the end of the “pretense of rationality of capitalism” and identifies
Latin American societies as “of risk of the globalized periphery,” and that
they are bound to suffer from two kinds of risks: first, global risks such as
global warming, intercontinental wars, and financial risks (16). Although
these risks deeply impact and affect our societies, we have no way of
preventing or avoiding them. Second, our own risks on a national level,
including unemployment, poverty, inequality and so forth, are risks that
our goverments assume in order to produce solutions for our most urgent
problems but which add to the growth of global risks.
A second line of thought focuses on the description of Latin Ameri-
can society through the lens of ethnicity and multiculturalism and there-
fore requires non-eurocentric categories to understand it. To do so, it is
necesssary to criticize and break with the European social sciences model,
which has been accepted as universal. This school of thought has carried
out broad historical revisions in order to understand, criticize, and dis-
tance itself from the European model, and propose alternative models
(Mignolo 2003; Dussel 2003). This tradition intends to redefine catego-
ries using the insertion of Latin America into a global and colonial sys-
tem as a starting point and by arguing that “[t]he historical process that
defined the historical dependency from Europe as the power world center
started here [Latin America]” (Quijano 1992: 106). Quijano sustains that
Latin America never actually reached modernity and even today is repro-
duced as modern/colonial. According to him, Latin America acceses the
world market at a time of rapid expansion but one that is still dominated
by a Spanish colonization of a “dark” medieval type. With the extraordi-
nary profits reaped from America, Spain strenghtened the pre-capitalist
exploitation in this continent and also violently “undemocratized” inde-
pendent communities in Spain (Basques, Catalans, etc.), thus generating
an internal colonialism and the destruction of the internal Spanish pro-
ductions. This process called the Lord’s Regime (regimen señorial), is
what made for the enrichment and secularization of Central and Northern
Europe. This regime destroyed a historical, socio-cultural, and demo-
graphic world in perhaps the most important destruction in the history of
mankind. This holocaust generated a new system of world domination,
whose central tenet is the concept of race (Quijano and Wallerstein 1994).
It pointed to not only native aborigines but also to the immediately “eth-
nitized” black slaves. Race was originally a way to distinguish Indians
from Iberians, later extended to distinguish blacks as well. The concept of

race became congealed within the system of social exploitation. By the
end of the sixteenth century, blacks were by definition slaves while Indi-
ans were servants. In the eighteenth century, among mulattos it was the
hue of their skin color that defined their social and work status. White-
ness was identified with the “West” and its modernity, and this concept’s
relevance extended into the era after national independences. The coloni-
alism of the powers-that-be implied the sociological invisibility of non-
Europeans, that is, the overwhelming majority of the Latin American
population. In this sense, the recent indigenous and African-American
political-cultural movements definitely question—for Quijano—the
European version of modernity and propose an alternative rationality
premised on the idea of social equality. It also denies the legitimacy of
the nation-state founded in the coloniality of power and proposes the af-
firmation and reproduction of the reciprocity and its ethics of social soli-
darity as an alternative option to the predatory tendencies of modern capi-
talism. In any case, the question of identity takes centerstage in a histori-
cally open and heterogeneous project (Quijano 2007).
A third, very dynamic line of contemporary sociology takes off from
social movements research. This school of thought evolved out of a so-
ciological analysis of the resistence to the dictatorships and has important
peculiarities with respect to the social movements in hegemonic countries.
In these movements, we find “old” social movements such as working
unions, renewing themselves and extending to non-factory sectors (De la
Garza 2005) and “new” social movements that develop in new social
“spaces.” Its relevance lies in the dynamism and diversity of Latin Amer-
ica. These movements may be linked to re-democratization struggles and
attempts to access public services, as well as to to urban, rural, ethnic,
union, feminist, ecological or international movements or a wide range of
combinations among them. They appear as a social expression of a de-
mand for change and they reflect the incapacity of the state to meet social
demands and aspirations within today’s historical context. They are
socio-political actions by collective social actors belonging to different
social classes and socioeconomic and political groups. These actions take
place in a social and political-cultural process that creates a collective
identity or new subjectivities for the movement members, originated from
common interests (Falero 2008). This identity is amalgamated by the
solidarity principle and built from the referential base of cultural and po-
litical values shared by the group in non-institutionalized collective
spaces. It takes the form of struggle for social, civic or political rights.
Therefore they are autonomous from the state as well as from political
parties despite their ties with and being influenced by them. Social
movements generate a series of innovations in the public (governmental

or non-governmental) and private spheres. They participate directly or
indirectly in the political processes of the country and contribute to the
development and transformation of civil and political society. Hence,
they participate in the historical-social change of a country (Ghon 1997).
A great number of sociologists, observing these movements or participat-
ing in them, try to project new emancipatory megatales that may be im-
parted to all Latin America. Although these tendencies are on a different
level of sociological reflection than previous ones, they dialogue with
them to a great extent.
1) A new sociology of production emerges with the intention of fig-
uring out the extent to which the Latin American economy can develop
self-sustaining production models. This tendency strenghtens with the
2002 crisis, when enterprises and the whole system appear to be extraor-
dinarily fragile because of external reasons. A new tendency questions
the sustainability of our productive models such as the “maquilas” in
México, and the coherence of productive chains or clusters based in Latin
America as part of other regions (Contreras and Carrillo 2003). These
(mostly) economic worries find important sociological contributions in
the proceses of work organization and their transformation (Novick 2000),
organizational work and risk analysis (Walter and Pucci 2007) and so
forth. This sociology relates to entrepreneurial and union actors, but fo-
cuses on the optimization of organizational and productive processes of
goods and services. It is inscribed within an emancipatory megatale in the
sense that this line of sociological thought tries to break free from the
economic logic and strategies of hegemonic countries, or at least, estab-
lish certain spaces of negotiation with them.
2) Most sociologists are busy in this period with a professional soci-
ology that intends to solve multiple sectorial problems or formulate diag-
noses or produce descriptive data for public or private decision-making
processes. In the “Latin American Sociology Treaty,” De la Garza (2006)
points out that, in opposition to other first world sociology manuals
which are organized by big theoretical trends (such as functionalism,
Marxism, etc.), the most traditional path of organizing the exposition by
specialized subdisciplines of sociology was chosen. In the Treaty, there
are subjects like the sociology of culture, historical sociology, the sociol-
ogy of work and family, the sociology of syndicalism, the sociology of
organizations, the sociology of entrepreneural actors, urban sociology,
rural sociology, the sociology of law, the sociology of health, and the so-
ciology of religion among others. Although these tendencies maintain a
dialogue with the specialized sociologies of central countries and at times
with other tendencies of Latin American sociology that were mentioned
above, they are extremely sensitive to the inequalities that plague Latin
America as a continent and to the struggles for social, civil, and political
rights. Therefore these sociologies produce excellent descriptions of Latin
American societies and foster the development of emancipatory mega-
tales.
3) Finally, a relevant sociology of denunciation has developed. In all
meetings of Latin American regional associations, including ALAS,
ALAST, and ALASRU, the majority of seminars denounce situations
considered unacceptable by the researchers. In general terms, such
research provides little in the way of a heuristic perspective for sociology
as a whole. Even so, it is highly relevant because it expresses society’s
malaise as explained by sociologists. A second more elaborated form of
this sociology of denunciation is dedicated to criticizing, on the one hand,
the new categories which seem to define the functioning of today’s
society, or rather, a proposal of how our societies function. This line of
analysis criticizes categories such as “employability” or “equality of
opportunity” because beyond their seemingly progressive intentions, they
operate as concepts in a neoliberal macrologic which places the market as
society’s main focus. These concepts tend to strengthen and give
consistency to this neoliberal focus. Finally this sociology of
denunciation is also present in the sociopolitical sphere in some countries
like Argentina. It shows the authoritarian aspect in the post-dictatorship
phase, in particular with the piquetero movement. The work of Marisela
Svampa tries to demonstrate that beyond its formal aspects, the politics
related to social movements are still strongly repressive. The
characteristics of this kind of sociology are a sort of public sociology,
since it is not only expressed in specialized magazines but also
communicated in mass newspapers. It aims to produce categories, with a
strong expressive content, their validity determined by the extent to
which not only academia, but the general public, the communicators and
the oppositional political sector adopts them.
CONCLUSION
Latin American sociology has faced a dual dilemma: on the one hand, it
has had to deal with theoretical systems from Europe or North America,
and on the other hand, it has joined a very problematic political world
during the post-war era, from which did not want or did not know how to
distance itself, in general terms.
There, to my understanding, lies the strength and weakness of Latin
American sociology: its capacity for active commitment but which also
keeps it from building its own conceptual systems. Its production has al-
ways been of conceptual categories that never culminate in theoretical
systems, but that have nevertheless moved and expressed the aims of dif-
ferent social movements or served as the basis of public and private deci-
sions, all fundamental for social change.
Its lack of thematical and theoretical unity today may become a
source of revitalization if it can adopt a common focus and very general
goals. We think it already has these goals, although it does not make them
visible explicitly and systematically. The focus on inequality in all its
possible manifestations and the shared goal to fight for all social, civil,
and political rights could serve as as the positive correlation of a Latin
American sociology that renews itself without losing its ties with the tra-
dition that inspired it.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abramo, L. and Montero, C. “Origen y evolución de la Sociología del

Trabajo en América latina.” In Tratado latinoamericano de
Sociología del Trabajo, edited by E. De la Garza Toledo, pp. 65-94.
Mexico: Colegio de México, FLACSO, UAM and Fondo de Cultura
Económica, 2000.
Borón, A. “Prefacio.” In La trama del neoliberalismo. Mercado, crisis y
exclusión social, edited by E. Sader and P. Gentili. Buenos Aires,
Argentina: CLACSO.
Cardoso, F.H. and E. Faletto. Desarrollo y Dependencia en América
Latina. Siglo XXI. Mexico, 1977.
Cardoso F.H. “Notas sobre el estado actual de los estudios de la
Dependencia”. In Problemas del subdesarrollo latinoamericano, ed-
ited by S. Bagú, F.H. Cardoso, A. Córdova, T. Dos Santos and H.
Silva Michelena. Mexico: Nuestro Tiempo, 1978.
CEPAL. “El Desarrollo Social. De América latina en la posguerra.”
Buenos Aires, Argentina: Solar/Hachette, 1963.
Cueva, A. “Problemas y perspectivas de la teoría de la dependencia.” In
Debates sobre la teoría de la dependencia y la sociología
latinoamericana, edited by D. Camacho. San José, Costa Rica: San
José educa., 1979.
De la Garza Toledo, E. “¿Cuál puede ser el campo de la Sociología a los
inicios del siglo XXI?” In Tratado latinoamericano de Sociología,
edited by E. De la Garza Toledo. Mexico: Anthropos / UAM, 2005.
Dussel, E. “Europa, modernidad y eurocentrismo.” Buenos Aires:
CLACSO, 2003.
Falero, A. Las batallas por la subjetividad: luchas sociales y

construcción de Derechos en Uruguay. Montevideo, Uruguay: CSIC,
2008.
Fals Borda, O. and Brandão C. R. Investigación participativa. Montevi-
deo, Uruguay : Instituto del Hombre / Ed. Banda Oriental
Montevideo, 1991.
Ghon, M.G. Teorias dos Movimentos sociais. São Paulo, Brazil: Loyola,
1997.
Freire, P. La educación como práctica de la libertad. Buenos Aires,
Argentina: Siglo XXI, 1974.
Graciarena, J. Poder y clases en el Desarrollo de América latina. Buenos
Aires, Argentina : Paidós, 1967.
Gonzalez Casanova, P. Sociología de la explotación. Buenos Aires,
Argentina: CLACSO, 2006 (1969).
-----. Globalidad, neoliberalismo y democracia. Mexico: CII en Ciencias
y Humanidades/ UNAM, 1995
Ianni, O. Imperialismo y cultura de la violencia en América latina.
Mexico: Siglo XXI, 1969.
Medina Echavarría, J. Consideraciones sociológicas sobre el desarrollo
de América latina. San José, Costa Rica : San José educa, 1980.
Mignolo, W. 2003. Historias locales/diseño globales. Colonialidad,
conocimientos subalternos y pensamiento fronterizo. Madrid, Spain:
Tres Cantos, 2003.
-----. La idea de América Latina. La herida colonial y la opción
descolonial. Buenos Aires, Argentina: GEDISA, 2007.
Nun, J. Marginalidad y exclusión social. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura
económica, 2001.
Novick, M. “La transformación de la Organización del trabajo.” In
Tratado latinoamericano de Sociología del Trabajo, edited by E. De
la Garza Toledo, pp. 123-147. Mexico: Colegio de México,
FLACSO, UAM and Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2000.
Quijano, A. “Colonialidad del poder y la experiencia cultural
latinoamericana.” In Pueblo, época y desarrollo: la sociología de
América Latina, edited by R. Briceño-León and H. R. Sonntag.
Caracas, Venezuela: Nueva Sociedad, 1992.
-----. “Don Quijote y los molinos de viento en América latina.” In De la
Teoría crítica a una crítica plural de la modernidad, edited by O.
Kozlarek, pp. 123-146. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Biblos, 2007.
Quijano A. and I. Wallerstein. “Americanity as a Concept or the Ameri-
cas in the Modern World-System.” International Social Sciences
Journal, 44(1992): 549-558.
Robles, F. El desaliento inesperado de la modernidad. Concepción, Chile:

Sociedad hoy / Dirección de Investigación U.de Concepción, 2000.
Rosemann, M.R. Pensar América latina. El desarrollo de la Sociología
latinoamericana. Buenos Aires, Argentina: CLACSO libros, 2008.
Sader, E. and P. Gentili. Pós-neoliberalismo: as políticas sociais e o
estado democrático. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Terra e Paz, 1995.
-----. La trama del Neoliberalismo. Mercado crisis y exclusión social.
Buenos Aires, Argentina: FLASCO, 1999.
Touraine, A. and T. Di Tella. Huachipato y Lota. Paris, France: CNRS,
1967.
Walter, J. and F. Pucci. “La gestión del Riesgo y las crisis”. Fon CSI –
San Andrés y Buenos Aires, Argentina: Ateneo, 2007.
Weffort, F. “Notas sobre la teoría de la dependencia: teoría de clases o
ideología nacional.” Revista Política y Sociedad, no 17, (1994): 97-
115. (Orig. pub. 1972).
84 Tom Dwyer
On the Internationalization of Brazilian

Academic Sociology
Tom Dwyer, State University of Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil1
The origins of contemporary Brazilian sociology go back to the cities of

São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro and were strongly associated with the pres-
ence of foreign sociologists who played important roles, from the 1930s,
in setting up what became important sociology departments or centers.
Their influence guaranteed that early generations of Brazilian sociologists
were trained and subsequent efforts permitted sociology to acquire a
small degree of international exposure.
FROM BRAZILIAN SOCIOLOGY’S EARLY RECEPTION OF

INTERNATIONAL INFLUENCES TO ITS EARLY
INSTITUTIONALIZATION
Sociological production during this early period was not subjected to in-
ternational exposure. In spite of their extraordinary importance, of the
foundational works of three sociologists who are today considered as
classical Brazilian sociology, only one major work has been published in
English.2 This has certainly deprived foreign researchers of access to an
understanding of Brazil and of Brazilian thought, one that would enrich
their comprehension of the limits and strengths of the application of clas-
sical sociological theories for understanding social formations that, while
having very strong roots in the European traditions, are quite innovative.
In 1950, the Brazilian Sociological Society (SBS) was founded; what
precipitated this move was a letter from the newly established Interna-
tional Sociological Association (ISA) where the Sociological Society of
São Paulo (founded in 1934) was asked if the society would be interested
in representing Brazil by joining ISA. In other words, the SBS was
founded with a view to internationalizing Brazilian sociology. From an
1
Tom Dwyer is President of the Brazilian Sociological Society.
2
The three classic books are: “Casa Grande e Senzala” (“The Master and the
Slaves”) by Gilberto Freyre (1933), “Raízes do Brasil” (“Roots of Brazil”) by
Sérgio Buarque de Holanda (1936) and “Formação do Brasil Contemporâneo”
(“The Formation of Contemporary Brazil”) by Caio Prado Junior (1942).
On the Internationalization of Brazilian Academic Sociology 85
early stage two Brazilians occupied positions on the ISA’s Executive

Committee, the first president of the SBS Fernando de Azevedo between
1950-1952 and Luiz Costa Pinto between 1953 and 1959. Over the fol-
lowing years teaching programs in sociology were set up in diverse parts
of the country. In these early days Brazil was a poor, largely rural coun-
try and quality transport was not readily available, so few sociology de-
partments were set up and few students were trained.3 In 1954 and 1962
national sociology conferences were held.
SECOND PHASE: DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION AND

A CERTAIN INTERNATIONALIZATION OF PRODUCTION4
In 1964, a populist left-wing government, which had allies in the trade

union and rural workers’ movements, was overthrown by a right-wing
military coup, which had support among the middle and upper classes.
As the military regime consolidated its power, especially from the end of
1968, the process of sociology’s institutionalization was severely debili-
tated. Some prominent sociologists lost their jobs in public universities,
others were imprisoned, tortured, and went into exile. The SBS went into
hibernation, and the academic sociological community spent over two
decades without organizing its own conferences. Brazilian sociology ex-
perienced many other difficulties, both institutional and linked to research
and teaching during the military regime. The subjects studied changed
and it became more difficult to carry out empirical research because of a
combination of censorship, fear, and lack of funding.
Many Brazilian sociologists lived a painful process of forced interna-
tionalization that corresponded to their periods of exile. They became
exposed to the reality of countries such as Chile (before Pinochet’s coup),
Mexico, France, United Kingdom, Canada, and the USA. This experi-
ence forced many to start thinking about Brazilian reality in new ways.
During the dictatorship, the Latin American Sociological Association’s
(ALAS) bi-annual conferences became a significant meeting ground for
Brazilian sociologists, which also proved true for sociologists in other
Latin American countries under military rule. Also, many who had gone
into exile became exposed to international ideas. In addition, interna-
tional organizations, particularly the Ford Foundation and some European
3
From the early 1930s until 1955 a total of 280 people earned sociology degrees
in the State of São Paulo. In Rio de Janeiro, such statistics are more difficult to
produce because of the variety of institutions involved; between 1939 and 1948 a
total of 35 degrees were awarded (Brunner and Barrios 1987)
4
This section is drawn from Porto, M. S. G. and Dwyer, T. (forthcoming).
86 Tom Dwyer
foundations, played a role in financing critical social sciences in Brazil.

In this period, there was a certain projection of Brazilian sociology
onto the international scene as the book Dependency and Development in
Latin America written by Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Enzo Faletto
(1979) was translated into a number of languages. Indeed, it was during
this period of the dictatorship that the image of Brazilian sociology in the
world seems to have been very positive. Not only was the discipline en-
gaged in the movement for democratic change, but it also produced
scholarly work that was highly relevant to its own society and to interna-
tional sociology.
Cardoso would become vice president of the ISA between 1978 and
1982 and its president from 1982 to 1986.
INSTITUTIONALIZATION AND A LOW DEGREE OF

INTERNATIONALIZATION OF PRODUCTION
Institutionalization
In all fields of science and technology in Brazil, it has been common to

attribute what is seen as mediocre performance to successive military and
civilian government mismanagement, e.g., start-stop policies, the legacy
of high inflation, and the lack of commitment of resources (Fernandes
1990; Schwartzmann 1994). In the social sciences, the forces that affect
the natural sciences were aggravated by the severe difficulties found un-
der military rule. These have meant that it has fallen on the present gen-
eration of senior sociologists to take responsibility for the reinstitutionali-
zation of the discipline: founding (or restructuring) departments, develop-
ing curricula, developing post-graduate programs from scratch, founding
and editing scientific reviews, developing the discipline’s scientific soci-
ety (SBS), etc.5 One consequence of such internal demands has been to
reduce the time available for research and for confronting the numerous
hurdles placed in front of those who wish to internationalize their produc-
5
Beyond there being some 60 Brazilian sociological reviews in Latindex in 2005,
there were some 132 degree awarding programs in 84 tertiary institutions and
13,000 students are enrolled in social sciences courses. There are about 900 uni-
versity teachers in the social sciences and a total of 1,700 masters and 1,400 doc-
toral students enrolled in 51 post-graduate programs (Leidke 2005). The most
recent bi-annual Brazilian Sociology Conference had some 2,600 registered par-
ticipants (nearly ten times the number of a decade earlier), and the SBS has
nearly 1,000 members. These numbers constitute evidence of the consolidation
and institutionalization of the area.
tion.
While it might appear that after more than two decades since the end
of military rule the institutionalization process has finished, in fact, new
demands arise. Most recently, in June 2008, the president of Brazil
signed into law a project that requires sociology (social sciences) to be
taught in all years of the high school education and in all of the more than
30,000 high schools in the country. This law reintroduces sociology, ex-
cluded by the military regime, into the secondary school curriculum. It
places huge demands on many senior members of the discipline, for they
shall have to write at least some of the specialized teaching materials
necessary for the high schools, participate in commissions, and especially
develop and teach courses to prepare a future generation of high school
sociology teachers.
From Academic to Non-Academic Sociology
So far, I have only mentioned academic sociology. However, at the same

time as the discipline becomes more institutionalized, it loses some of its
most talented members to non-academic pursuits.
In consolidated democracies, the political and administrative spheres
of power are usually relatively consolidated in institutional terms: a group
of highly qualified public policy developers and analysts exists (fre-
quently recruited from the ranks of sociology graduates), and the political
class is professional. Such is not the case in many Latin American coun-
tries, where some of the most prominent social scientists are seconded
from their universities into central and state government to play a role in
public policy development and analysis. More rarely they will temporar-
ily or permanently abandon their academic careers to exercise high politi-
cal office. In other words, the perceived success of the academic disci-
pline and the relative weakness of the administrative and political classes
combine to drain the discipline of some of its most talented academics.
As such, those who remain in the universities frequently have to work
harder to guarantee that basic teaching is carried out.
Internationalization of Teaching and Training

In Brazil, the ideas of foreigners, and especially European and North
Americans, have been received for a long time and have fed and made
Brazilian sociology prosper as an intellectual exercise.
The tradition, which can be observed from the 1930s onwards, of
importing foreign works, reading them intensely, and trying to apply
them to build up an understanding of Brazilian society, has indeed been a
88 Tom Dwyer
hallmark of our sociology. Most post-graduate programs require reading

proficiency in one or two foreign languages (beyond Spanish, which is
easily read by native speakers of Brazilian Portuguese) as a prerequisite
for entry. This means that teachers are able to use a wide range of
sources and foreign texts (especially books). As a consequence, many
Brazilian sociologists are capable of mixing literature written in English,
French, Spanish, and Portuguese languages to build a type of sociology
that is extremely cosmopolitan, thereby guaranteeing an international fla-
vor to local production. From my own observations, this is not so com-
mon among sociologists from English, French, and many Spanish-
speaking countries.
In the past, a major obstacle to producing world-class sociology in
Brazil was the lack of quality research libraries. Today, there are severe
problems with the book collections in all Brazilian university libraries;
however, the availability of journals has increased remarkably with large
collections (mainly written in English) now being available on-line in the
most important universities. On-line databases such as Sociological Ab-
stracts and Social Science Citations Index have also become widely
available over the last decade to staff and students in all major Brazilian
universities; however, the numbers of systematic users still appears to be
quite low. One reason for this is that students observe that such databases
do not adequately reflect international sociological production, because
(as we shall soon see) their contents neglect much Brazilian and Latin
American production; as such, their legitimacy is questioned.
It is worth noting that the return of democracy and the institutionali-
zation of academic science and technology have been associated with an
increased percentage of students completing their postgraduate training in
Brazil. While this change reduces the exposure of the next generation of
teachers to overseas living and academic cultures, it increases their sensi-
tivity to their own country. In order to guarantee that the relative increase
in the numbers of students studying at home does not result in academic
disciplines become nationalistic or provincial in outlook, scholarships are
widely available for postgraduate students to travel overseas for up to a
year to enhance their doctoral training. Students typically attend univer-
sities in the Northern hemisphere, particularly ones to which their advi-
sors or research teams already have institutional linkages. This has oc-
curred due to generous government and limited international agency sup-
port.
INTERNATIONALIZING BRAZILIAN
SOCIOLOGY’S PRODUCTION
I shall divide this discussion into a number of sections. The first will ex-
amine the relationships with the ISA; the second will look at indexing of
international sociology; following up on this, some considerations will be
traced with regards to the forces that appear to operate upon sociological
production from non-central countries. Subsequently, the question of
language shall be examined. In the final part of this paper, I shall explore
how Brazilian sociology is reacting to such forces and to the changing
nature of power in the world that is redefining what internationalization
means.
The ISA as a Factor of Internationalization
Generous government and funding agency support has without doubt had
a role in underpinning Brazilian presence at the World Sociology confer-
ences, organized by the ISA. In the last two editions, Brazil had the
eighth largest national delegation in Brisbane and seventh largest at Dur-
ban. Brazilians have occupied leadership positions on some ISA research
committees and on the executive committee. Executive committee mem-
bers have included Neuma Aguiar (1990-1994) and Alice Abreu (2002-
2010), and currently, Brazil is the only Latin American country which is
represented on the ISA executive committee, where it has three members:
Alice Abreu, Elisa Reis, and José Vicente Tavares dos Santos. However,
while it is easy to form the impression that such presence helps interna-
tionalize the discipline, I am not aware of research that has sought to as-
certain the connection between such presence and the wider visibility and
image of Brazilian sociology internationally.
Brazilian researchers are active in many of the ISA research commit-
tees and certainly make their colleagues more aware to what is occurring
in Brazil and in Brazilian sociology. However, the difficulties of talking
in a foreign language, the outrageous fact that sessions allocate equal
time for presentations to native and non-native speakers, and also the fact
that sociologists from non-central countries feel obliged to make intro-
ductory remarks that set out the context of their country and their re-
search (something which researchers from central countries assume eve-
rybody knows) leads many to feel that they are not given a fair hearing.
Particularly, there is a diffuse feeling that a type of arrogance is exhibited
by native speakers who do not pay attention or show interest in what non-
native speakers have to say. To add insult to injury, native speakers fre-
90 Tom Dwyer
quently do not exhibit the cultural sensitivity to talk slowly when speak-
ing to a cosmopolitan audience.6
One problem is, indeed, that many of the papers presented at ISA do
not appear to be transformed into articles that are published internationally.
Recent ISA initiatives to permit sessions in languages other than the
ISA’s three official languages and to encourage national associations to
present session proposals are important steps to guarantee a wider range
of international activities at the world sociology conferences.
International Indexing of Publications
In the now distant past when there were no international indexing systems
and the scientific community was far smaller, scientific production was
recognized as “international” when it became widely visible. Since the
gradual return to democracy in Brazil during the 1980s, no single Brazil-
ian piece of academic sociology has been able to achieve the international
prominence of Cardoso and Faletto’s book. While this book was widely
appreciated among scholars in central countries, it achieved large audi-
ences in Latin America and in other dependent countries such as India,
New Zealand, and Australia. In the absence of widely recognized “great
books” written by Brazilian authors, we must move to look at other indi-
cators of internationalization.
Alice Abreu (2002) pointed out that the percentage of all ISI indexed
articles published in Brazil in the year 2000 was 1.33%, less than one half
of the percentage published by Australia (2.83%), a country with a popu-
lation that is about one tenth the size of Brazil’s.7 This is just one indica-
6
I personally feel that these problems are sometimes so important that should
ISA consider obliging all of those who present their work in ISA conference to
speak in their second language (as long as it were one of the three official ISA
languages). We would go a great way to removing a considerable source of
domination exerted by many of our English native-speaker colleagues. It would
also remove a source of considerable irritation and ill-feeling for non-native
speakers of English (which is increasingly becoming ISA’s lingua franca). Of
course, there is a practical obstacle: not many native English speakers even know
how to read, let alone speak, a second language! Indeed, in my view, the ques-
tion of linguistic domination by English is a serious obstacle to the internation-
alization of sociology. Also, the lack of knowledge of foreign languages by Eng-
lish native speaking sociologists seriously limits their capacity to understand the
role that language plays in forming social imagination and guiding practices, and
it impoverishes, because such sociologists exclude themselves from having an
intimate knowledge of other conceptual and cultural systems.
7
It is of course necessary to evaluate the number of scientists in each country
and the demands on them. Also, it is more probable that Brazilian rather than
Australian scientists publish in non-indexed reviews. A further element of a pos-
tion of the type of structural problems faced with regards to internation-

alization. Many Brazilian and Latin American scientific reviews in all
fields, for a number of reasons that include problems of regularity in their
production, and lack of institutionalization of the publishing field, are not
listed by the internationally recognized indexing services. There are
some indications that this is changing, as the number of articles by Brazil-
ian researchers in all fields indexed by ISI increased by four times in the
1990 to 2002 period (Abreu 2007). One reason for this movement, which
has not really touched the humanities and the social sciences, has been a
large increase in Brazilian natural science reviews edited in English.8
The number of Brazilian sociology publications that are quoted in ISI is
very small. Alice Abreu (2007) has observed that less than 3% of Latin Ameri-
can sociology journals that are indexed in Latindex (www.latindex.unam.mx)
are included in ISI.
When we examine Sociological Abstracts we can see that the pres-
ence of Brazilian resident authors is extremely reduced. Consider the
following table:
NO. Articles published % Articles with %

Articles in Brazil authors from Brazil
1970 7.835 19 0.24 17 0.22
1980 15.166 23 0.15 21 0.14
1990 22.175 53 0.24 95 0.43
2000 28.422 372 1.31 247 0.86
2005 28.658 554 1.93 45 ***
Here we see evidence that an increasing number of articles published

in Brazil are indexed in Sociological Abstracts. If we exclude the year
2005 for which data was incomplete (data for this table was collected in
July 2008), the number of Brazilian resident authors also appears to be on
the increase. However, the contribution of both Brazilian published arti-
sible explanation is given by Connell (2007), “Natural scientists in Australia also

have strong international connections, but they are focused on the United States
and Britain, a pattern of quasi-globalisation” (218).
8
The online Brazilian Political Science Review
(www.bpsr.org.br/english/revista/natual.htm) was launched recently in an
attempt to internationalize the audiences of that discipline’s production.
However, it has not yet been indexed internationally.
The recently inaugurated SciELO English Language Edition
(http://socialsciences. scielo.org/scielo.php) contains a limited number of Eng-
lish-language versions of articles that had previously appeared in some Brazilian
and other Latin American social science journals.
92 Tom Dwyer
cles and Brazilian authors appears to remain extremely low.

Raewyn Connell’s (2007) book reflects about how researchers from
countries that lie on the periphery will have severe difficulties in having
their voices heard in international debates and publications, particularly
books, “Texts are also material objects produced by publishers and gov-
erned by copyright laws. It has always been difficult for works published
in the periphery to circulate in the metropolitan centers and to other parts
of the periphery” (219).
A good example of a case where English language use is handled re-
markably well by non-native English speakers are the Nordic countries.
A search was carried out using the most recently developed international
indexing system, Google Scholar (GS), of the publications of members of
16 sociology departments. The research team found that only 15% of
scholars have more than five publications that turned up in the search.
While 85% of department members that turn up in the GS search had at
least one publication, less than 25% of these are cited more than ten times
(Aaltojarvi et al. 2008). In other words, there appears to be a high degree
of invisibility built into careers that, even when they can easily be con-
ducted in the English language, are conducted outside of central coun-
tries.9
However, such an observation appears to affect not only the social
sciences. A Costa Rican biologist wrote, “Some of my colleagues dream
of having a paper published in Nature or Science, usually considered the
two most influential journals (in that order). However, their chances are
low (for example, Science accepts 20% of manuscripts from the USA but
only 1% of papers from ‘Third World’ countries)” (Gibbs 1995). The
author concludes:
Tropical scientists have three basic options. They can despair and make
no effort to do good science, they can choose to live at the shadow of
temperate science, trying to please the interests of temperate journals,
readers and citation indices, or they can do what the USA did so suc-
cessfully after spending many years at the shadow of British science,
that is, to develop a local scientific pride based on quality and a good
balance between basic and applied science.
National agencies that evaluate scientific activity are increasingly

demanding that scientists publish internationally. Ming-Chang Tsai ob-
served at the 2005 ISA Conference of National Associations that a posi-
9
Here we include countries such as India, South Africa, Australia, and New Zea-
land.
tive evaluation based on the key indicator used by the Taiwanese evalua-
tion agency, number of publications indexed by the SSCI, was almost
entirely dependent on the country of advanced training. Basically, those
trained in North America were indexed, whereas those trained elsewhere
were far more likely to have few indexed publications. At the same
meeting, Victor Arayza observed that his Israeli colleagues, should they
wish to publish internationally, would have their best chances if they
were to write about the only subject that seems to interest the so-called
“international” journals: the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and its ramifica-
tions. In other words, in order to be positively evaluated, it is necessary
to turn one’s back on the investigation of many pressing problems of
one’s society, because they are problems which do not spark “interna-
tional” interest. Indeed, these two papers suggest that if one works out-
side of the central countries, it is necessary to deform one’s thinking and
research agendas to respond to research questions and to standards that
are imposed from abroad, in order to be considered a good “international
class” scholar by the evaluating agencies. Here, indeed, we are talking
about a distortion that is produced by the demand that scientific produc-
tion be evaluated by reference to publications in scientific journals that
are recognized as being international; in both cases publication in the re-
searcher’s native language is considered to be less relevant than publica-
tion in English.
In other words, the domination of international publishing markets,
indexing systems, and referees by researchers from the central countries
appears to threaten the capacity to produce knowledge in an autonomous
fashion in the non-central countries. At this same ISA conference, I re-
member hearing Pharta Mukherji, a former president of the Indian Socio-
logical Society, use an expression to refer to colleagues who have be-
come so infatuated with the West or of having influence in the West; he
referred to them as developing a “captive mind syndrome.” This indeed
is a very powerful expression, and without consciously combating it, the
social sciences are condemned to lose their unique perspective, which is
not only theoretical and methodological, but which is also embedded in a
culture and where research problems are classically determined by their
relevance to society.
Raewyn Connell (2007) argues that Southern theories are excluded
from world sociologies and that it is necessary to draw on marginalized
forms of knowledge to reconstruct our image of the world. In other
words, the Northern-dominated power structures are seen impeding the
development of a viable sociology capable of responding to the com-
plexities of our times.
94 Tom Dwyer
DIFFICULTIES OF INTERNATIONALIZATION
OF SOCIOLOGY
For Sociologists from Non-English Speaking Countries
Connell’s interesting book leaves to a side any examination of the com-

plex questions posed by the domination that the English language has
achieved since the end of World War II and that threatens the very idea
that it is possible to develop an “international sociology.” ISA recog-
nized the nature of this problem over a decade ago when it commissioned
a report on the language question that was presented at the Montreal Con-
ference by Alain Touraine (1998). One important conclusion of this re-
port was that “Sociology should consider itself as a world discipline inte-
grating various intellectual traditions, especially when they have deep
historical roots.” This is a point that appears to be very similar to Con-
nell’s.
Few native English speakers realize how difficult it is to produce for
a refereed journal that is published in a foreign country and language.
Pina Cabral (2007), a prominent Portuguese social scientist, recently pro-
duced a short reflection around the question of internationalization of the
social sciences. He notes that even senior social scientists who have pub-
lished from the beginning of their careers and who have been fortunate
enough to have seen their articles in journals and well-received edited
books are often treated, when they submit articles and chapters for review
in English language publications, as beginners; the work is refereed by
very junior colleagues, who do not have sufficient understanding of what
is being said to adequately review the article. Indeed, I have heard simi-
lar complaints over cafezinhos with Brazilian colleagues.
However, for those who choose to publish in ISI-indexed journals,
Pina Cabral remarks that adopting such a strategy does not normally work
well for those who are outside of the globally defined circuits of excel-
lence, which are always linked to the hegemonic centers of power. Given
the very nature of social power in intellectual fields, he argues, it is diffi-
cult to imagine things occurring in any other way. The capacity to guar-
antee a future (futuridade) for the results of scientific research on knowl-
edge production as a whole is not measurable in simple terms of “objec-
tive impact factors” that are so loved by technocratic evaluators. It is not
enough to publish articles that are considered worthwhile in English to
guarantee futuridade for what one publishes. Pina Cabral defends an idea
that appears to emerge from rational choice theory: citation may depend
on a type of cost-benefit relationship between the citer and the cited (and,
of course, those who are deliberately not cited). Frequently, to publish in
English it becomes necessary to deny one’s intellectual roots to succeed.

Pina Cabral explains, “It is more interesting / chic to quote Foucault (be-
cause he is an American craze, which has nothing to do with loving
things French) than Thales de Azevedo, even when what is being said has
more to do with the brilliant work of the latter, which, for the majority …
is simply unknown” (236).
A Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
W. I. Thomas’s genial formulation that if people define a situation as real

it will be real in its consequences contributes to explain the low levels of
internationalization of the production of Brazilian sociology. We do not
publish in English, because we know that the odds are against us, and
when published it is highly likely that we shall be ignored.10 To submit
any article for publication is always a time-consuming operation; to pre-
pare articles in a foreign language normally requires spending consider-
able money on translation and revision. However, journals that use blind
referees do not permit the researcher to have a reasonable degree of cer-
tainty of achieving a favorable outcome. Indeed, we are far from being
naïve actors; we know that much of what is unique in our society does
not interest those who have power to define the so-called universal in
terms of a dominant Western paradigm (which, in reality, is not one but
many). For such reasons, many do not see publishing in English as a re-
alistic goal.
Brazilian sociologists tend to give greater importance, as do sociolo-
gists in many lands, to the publication of books and book chapters in their
native language than to the publication in refereed scientific reviews in
English. This option can be interpreted in many ways, as part of a tradi-
tion, a desire to be relevant, or a flight from the challenges, the rigor, the
marked playing cards, and the possible humiliation involved in having
one’s work evaluated “internationally.” In Brazil, the vast majority of
book production occurs nationally,11 and should it circulate internation-
ally, this will only occur in other countries that use the Portuguese lan-
10
It is important to note that there exist specialists on Brazil who are called
“Brazilianists.” They normally (especially the more junior ones) write ignoring
Brazilian production and do so using concepts from the central countries to fit
their writings about Brazil into a supposedly “international” (but usually North
American) perspective.
11
It is important to note that the system of national circulation of books pub-
lished in the various regions of Brazil is often fragile. This led the SBS to launch,
in 2006, its first scientific review, SBS Resenhas, which publishes book reviews
online twice a year (to be found on www.sbsociologia.com.br).
96 Tom Dwyer
guage and more rarely in Latin American countries and nations that use
Latin languages. Also, many Brazilian sociologists appear not to con-
sider publication in national refereed journals to be more important than
publication in non-refereed journals. Such a state of affairs is a result of
the “culture of the invitation,” whereby people prefer to be invited to
submit an article, in full knowledge that publication will be guaranteed,
than to go through the considerable effort and pain necessary to publish
in a refereed journal.
***
Renato Ortiz (2006) incisively summarized the nature of the question

when he considered that no language could be considered a “lingua
franca;” such a role is only exercised in certain specific areas where it
takes on the function of being “franca.” He described:
In this way English language, in the natural sciences, serves as a pre-

dominantly ‘franca’ language; its role concentrates on the transmission
of information, minimizing the other dimensions of social life (prestige,
aesthetics, sentiments, etc.). But if this is possible, and this is the di-
mension that scientists value, a language which is emptied of other con-
notations with the aim of maximizing instrumental communication, so
valued by natural scientists - what can be said about the social sciences?
(35)
Indeed, we arrive at the provocative idea that it is impossible to develop

quality social sciences by resorting to a lingua franca. This implies that a
more complex strategy of internationalization must be adopted, one
which involves high quality translations, with all their expense and diffi-
culties, and which pays close attention to both narrative and concept de-
velopment as it occurs in given linguistic and socio-historical contexts.
TOWARDS AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW OF

INTERNATIONALIZATION: RECENT TRENDS IN THE
INTERNATIONALIZATION OF BRAZILIAN SOCIOLOGY
The Official Evaluation System

The Brazilian classificatory system has been built up in response to de-
mands from the leading funding agency CAPES, which conducts collec-
tive evaluations of post-graduate programs based on a complex system
based on peer evaluation (see Adorno and Dwyer 2006). Journals are
classified by merit into six categories: International A, B, and C, and Na-
tional A, B and C. Of the 23 journals that have been most recently classi-
fied by the sociology committee as “International A,” 12 are in published
in English, seven in Portuguese, two each in French and Spanish. The
number of journals classified as “International B” is, of course, far greater:
three are published in Portuguese, 16.5 in English, 9.5 in French, seven in
Spanish, one in Italian (the attribution of 0.5 to one journal having a bi-
lingual title).
It is important to note that seven Brazilian journals that are published
in Portuguese are considered international. In other words, they have
editorial boards with non-Brazilian members and articles that are consid-
ered to be of international quality. The sociology area committee of the
CAPES agency has made a strong movement to force the recognition that
certain Portuguese language publications are of international quality.
This introduces an endogenous definition of internationalization, rather
than a purely exogenous one.
Given the arguments that have been put forward earlier in this paper,
it is certainly not difficult for sociologists from other countries to under-
stand what is at stake here, the movement to define Portuguese language
publications as being of international quality is, of course, linked to the
defense of language as a basis of the culture of the society which social
scientists study and within which they must express themselves. How-
ever, there is also another aim: CAPES evaluates all areas of science, re-
sources can be allocated as a function of comparative evaluations of the
“worth” of each institution and area of knowledge, and the principle
measure of “worth” is international publication. In their search for re-
sources and power, natural scientists try to impose a universal criterion of
evaluation, where English-language publications are considered as inter-
national, on all other areas of science. If Portuguese-language publica-
tions are not considered “international,” social scientists would be attest-
ing to their own inferiority relative to the natural sciences. It far easier
for a natural scientist to submit publications making an instrumental use
of English, because such sciences are typically far more formalized and
socio-historical, and cultural context is far less important than in the so-
cial sciences.
REDEFINING INTERNATIONALIZATION
We have just seen that the sociology area committee of CAPES has pro-
duced a definition of internationalization that recognizes that publishing
98 Tom Dwyer
in Portuguese is to be considered, in certain cases, an international activ-

ity. This constitutes a political victory.
Until very recently, internationalization was defined as having links
to, publications in and using research and teaching materials from
wealthy Europe and North America (particularly the USA). More re-
cently, Latin America has been newly defined as important, particularly
in political sociology, where transitions towards democratic rule that oc-
curred from the mid-1980s onwards meant that similar social and politi-
cal processes were occurring in many countries simultaneously. Later,
this intensified as, on the one hand, globalization, neo-liberalism, and the
Washington Consensus were seen as imposing a certain sets of policies
on most governments. Popular responses emerged within many of these
societies to oppose the major forces criticized as seeking to impose ine-
quality and cultural and institutional homogeneity on quite diverse popu-
lations and to weaken governments’ capacity for autonomous action.
However, another form of internationalization came through increasing
regional exchanges, particularly in the Southern Cone, where the forma-
tion of Mercosul, a common market, has generated international research
agendas around many of the difficulties and challenges of economic inte-
gration and the concomitant rise of social problems. Also, there have
been increasing exchanges of students and university staff between these
countries, and the Spanish language is being more frequently studied in
Brazil (rather than improvised by mixing Portuguese and espanhol into
the hybrid portunhol). In the Amazon region, the perception of the exis-
tence of urgent problems such as environmental degradation, issues relat-
ing to native cultures and their survival, drug trafficking, rising violence,
development issues, and cross-border migration has led to a conscious-
ness of the need to develop pan-Amazonian perspectives. Whilst the vast
majority of the Amazon region’s area is located in Brazil, a large popula-
tion lives in neighboring countries and has been traditionally studied by
anthropologists. The rise of economic integration, modernization, and
more recent forces linked to globalization is altering research dynamics.
Official targeted support is serving to stimulate both Pan-Amazonian and
Mercosul-oriented research.
Globalization seems for many to be associated with the inevitable rise
of English as a world lingua franca. One of the reactions against this
seeming inevitability has been the formation of a political alliance of lu-
sophone (Portuguese speaking) countries. Beyond Brazil and Portugal,
these countries include East Timor (which, on independence, rejected
English as a possible national language, placing the Portuguese language
at the heart of its national identity), Angola, Mozambique, Guinea-Bissau,
São Tomé and Príncipe, and Cape Verde. Official support for the devel-
opment of commerce and cultural exchange between lusophone countries

has also extended into stimulus for scientific cooperation. In early Feb-
ruary of 2009, the 10th edition of the bi-annual Congresso Luso-Afro-
Brasileiro de Ciências Sociais was held in Braga, Portugal. While stud-
ies in specialized areas such as violence and historical sociology occa-
sionally have specific comparative dimensions, this conference is a point
where a visible tendency can be seen to develop a common approach
within the shadow of a linguistic community, a linguistic community
which is international and cosmopolitan, uniting both rich and poor coun-
tries, countries with populations with varying degrees of internal differen-
tiation, and at various stages of development, with problems of war and
violence, in a common reflection. It is still too early to speak of these
congresses as space where, in the shadow provided by a common linguis-
tic identity, which permits both affective and instrumental dimensions of
communication to be united, “counter-hegemonic” intellectual dynamics
can be developed. Such development is certainly a major bet of some
who are most deeply involved in this movement. There is a growing con-
sciousness that development will require stimulus for comparative re-
search between lusophone countries, greater visibility of the community’s
scientific journal Travessias, increased use by the countries of the Brazil-
ian-based online journal and indexing system Scielo (www.scielo.br) 12
and efforts to move towards institutionalizing lusophone social sciences.
Indeed, there appears to be an increasing perception at government
level of the necessity to develop deeper interchange with other countries
that employ Latin languages, especially Spanish, French, and Italian.
There have recently been scientific meetings in this direction. Also, there
have been efforts to bring together researchers specialized in Brazil under
auspices that are different to that provided by the metropolitan-dominated
conferences of the Latin American Studies Association and the Brazilian
Studies Association.
Quite recently, South Africa has become a reference point for some
Brazilian researchers. Our two countries have many apparently similar
social dynamics: school failure, extreme social exclusion, policies de-
signed to promote social integration, and extreme levels of violence.
Academic relations between South African and Brazilian sociologists
received initial early support and/or stimulus from the University of
Michigan and the Ford Foundation. As contacts developed, perceptions
12
As we saw in note 7, one relevant development is that Scielo now publishes
limited English-language online editions of some leading Brazilian Social Sci-
ence journals.
100 Tom Dwyer
grew of the existence of scientific problems that are common to both

countries have emerged.
The recently formed group of Heads of State (or government) of
India, Brazil, and South Africa (IBSA) meets annually and has formed
the IBSA trilateral development initiative. 13 The identity of this
seemingly disparate group is that its members are unique in that they
share large populations and areas, are developing countries, and have
democratic governments. Cooperation has rapidly resulted in the signing
of protocols to stimulate scientific research and in Brazil-specific
research funds becoming available.
Over recent years, there has been much talk about the future world
role to be played by a small group of previously subaltern or marginal-
ized countries that have large territories and populations and considerable
natural resources and will constitute not only large markets but will be
important producer nations. Most frequently referred to as the BRICs
(Brazil, Russia, India, and China) this loose and highly diverse group of
countries is marked, for Brazilian researchers, by considerable deficit in
both our knowledge and understanding. It is worthwhile noting that the
concept of BRICS is sometimes elastic, in Brazil the “S” may be capital-
ized to represent South Africa, and a “M” occasionally inserted to include
Mexico. Indian sociologists talk of a possible future inclusion of Paki-
stan should that country stabilize politically and become less hostile to
the West. As these countries play an increasing role on the world stage in
cultural, economic, and political terms, we can imagine that new tensions
will occur between them and European and North American countries,
tensions will emerge among them, and such tensions will produce new
questions for sociological analysis.
Of great importance to contemporary Brazil are the increasing rela-
tions with China. It is worthwhile noting the pioneering nature of the
work of one of the founding fathers of Brazilian social sciences, Gilberto
Freyre (2003), recently republished as a book under the title of China
Tropical. He documented some aspects of China’s (and indeed the Ori-
ent’s) historic influence on Brazil, which flowed from Portuguese-
administered Macao via Goa and served to shape the country, including
its customs, architecture, and lifestyles, until the 1850s, when new trading
patterns led to a decline in this influence and the United States’s long rise
to a hegemonic position in the region. A century later, he saw another
type of approximation emerging, as, in the mid-twentieth century, Brazil-
ian and Chinese xenophobia emerged in relation to dominant countries,
and especially the USA. While the USA continues to be Brazil’s first
13
www.ibsa-trilateral.org
trading partner, a rise in economic exchanges has today pushed China

into a position, entirely unimagined even a decade ago, as Brazil’s second
trading partner. With this comes a need to build and disseminate an un-
derstanding of Chinese culture in Brazil and vice versa. It is necessary to
build capacities to investigate and understand the conflicts that will inevi-
tably emerge as exchanges increase in many areas: immigration, leisure,
cultural exchange, tourism, commerce, etc. Chinese sociologists express
interest in learning about the extraordinary rapid processes of economic
and social change that occurred in Brazil during the 20th century and spe-
cifically how this had an impact on youth and also on government, such
interest is linked to attempting to understand the changes their country is
currently undergoing, which have few parallels in the history of the world.
Common research problems will emerge from this process. My bet is
that, should this happen, a new comparative dimension will be introduced
into the sociology of both countries.
The rise of these nations as economic powers has, in Brazil, started to
be associated with a change in perception of what is relevant for the in-
ternationalization of Brazilian sociology and the social sciences more
generally. Such a movement will take many years to build up, and cer-
tainly we shall have to learn from our North American and European
counterparts because their sociologies have had international ambitions
for a lot longer than Brazil. In terms of academic traditions, linguistic
skills, regular funding, and institution building they are certainly a far
ahead of us. It is imperative for sociology to widen its scope and to build
up a research dynamic that is increasingly South-South in nature. In this
way, we shall be able to understand our development processes through
the eyes of comparative research that are in dialogue with, but relatively
autonomous from, the research dynamics based on a North-South logic
that have dominated for so long. This is, in a way, what Raewyn Connell
(2007) and Boaventura de Sousa Santos and Maria Paula Meneses (2009),
in spite of their differences, are talking about.
I must note that the role of the SBS in this fast changing arena cannot
be omitted. It stimulates debates and encourages participation in interna-
tional forums, be they the traditional international ones, regional, or
linked to new global dynamics. Scientific societies have a responsibility
to lead and to stimulate. At the same time as Brazil’s bi-annual national
conferences always bring in some of the world’s leading sociologists to
talk, today participants come from an increasing variety of countries and
continents. Simultaneously, SBS is seen as having relevance to the agen-
das beyond other Latin American developing countries. Normally, invi-
tations to speak at conferences are made on an individual basis to promi-
nent Northern scholars; in Brazil’s case some invitations are made in an
102 Tom Dwyer
institutional manner, because many of our best sociologists are little

known internationally (and frequently for the reasons exposed earlier on
in this paper). While Brazil’s best sociologists are up-to date with inter-
national debates and read these in a cosmopolitan manner, oral expression
may be difficult. In the context of increasing formal international ex-
changes it is my bet that recourse to translators will become necessary to
guarantee that many of the most complex ideas, and contexts, be under-
stood as clearly as possible.
However, the fact is that these new intellectual dynamics are already
occurring. Brazilian social sciences must equip themselves to compre-
hend the recent rise of Brazil to the status of a regional power and, as ex-
pressed in the notion of the BRICs, to a more important player in a global
sense. Through exposure to other systems of social dynamics, new ways
of learning and new angles of vision will certainly develop, enriching our
understanding of ourselves and social theory. One key aspect will be the
development of a deeper understanding of other cultures and the proc-
esses of change that are occurring outside of the countries that are today
still referred to as “central.” Here we are not speaking so much of the
internationalization of Brazilian sociology but of the formation of a new
type of international sociology, one not envisageable before the building
of international databases, air travel, Internet, and appropriate funding for
comparative research. 14 The process by which our discipline will be
transformed is likely to be chaotic. Yet, sociologists will still be moti-
vated by the search for truth about universal dynamics of social life, and
oriented by a rereading of the classical and contemporary sociological
traditions, this motivation will guide sociologists into an labyrinth where
knowledge about the lives of social actors in many parts of the globe will
no-longer be able to be ignored. The complex nature of our contempo-
rary world marked by cultural conflicts, environmental change, the rise of
new centers of power, increasing exchanges of information and, as of
September 2008, by the collapse in the domination of a form of economic
thinking which sought to radically separate the economic dimensions of
life from its social and political ones, sets the stage upon which future
efforts will be conducted. In such a context, sociologists will redefine the
role and purposes of internationalized sociology.
14
Until very recently it was extremely difficult for Brazilian researchers to ob-
tain financing for South-South research. The international efforts of the funding
agencies, as occurs in many developing countries, were nearly all focused upon
developing academic and research relations with Northern countries: the
CAPES-COFECUB agreements with France, the many Brazilian cathedras in
European universities, scholarship allocation to study in Northern hemisphere
universities etc.
CONCLUSION
There is a tension inherent in the internationalization of Brazilian sociol-

ogy that comes from, on the one hand a need to be seen and recognized in
the centers that currently dominate world sociology, and on the other
hand there is the imperative, propelled by globalization and supported by
both the Brazilian government and committed researchers, to redefine
international scientific relations in a way that is adequate to a new and
changing international context. This latter effort raises a danger that is
not present in the former; Brazilian sociology (and indeed social science)
is small and has a strong commitment to being relevant within its own
country, yet in this new effort, we may end up spreading ourselves far too
thinly.
In the traditional centers of world power, the definitions and the crite-
ria of excellence appear to be already defined: change will only be incre-
mental; learn to play the game and your scientific work will can become
recognized for what it is worth. Such a definition, which as we have seen
serves as an obstacle to the development of an internationally recognized
Brazilian sociology, will be redefined in a multi-polar world.
We Brazilian sociologists still have a great deal of work to do at
home. Some of us seek international recognition in a traditional sense;
however, members of the discipline are now deeply involved in a process
of seeking to redefine what is international as what is relevant in the
world viewed from a Brazil in interaction with a renewed sociological
tradition.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abreu, A. “A (Strong?) Voice from the South? Latin American Sociol-

ogy Today.” Paper presented at the special session “Towards a
Global Sociology: Learning from Regional Experiences” at the ISA
World Congress of Sociology, Brisbane, 2002.
Abreu, A. “A Internacionalização da Ciência na América Latina e o
Caribe: o Contexto Institucional.” Paper presented at the XIII Brazil-
ian Sociology Congress, Recife, 2007.
Adorno, S. and T. Dwyer. “The Evaluation Culture and Postgraduate
Sociology Programmes in Brazil.” Paper presented at the World
Congress of Sociology, Durban, 2006
Aaltojarvi, I., Arminen, I., Auranen, O. and H.M. Pasanen. “Scientific
Productivity, Web Visibility, and Citation Patterns in Sixteen Nordic
Sociology Departments.” Acta Sociológica 51, no. 1 (2008): 5-22.
104 Tom Dwyer
Brunner, J. and A. Bairros. “Inquisición, Mercado y Filantropía. Ciencias

Sociales y Autoritarismo en Argentina, Brasil, Chile y Uruguay.” In
As Ciências Sociais na América Latina em Perspectiva Comparada
1930-2005, edited by H. Trindade and G. de Sierra, pp 71-169. Porto
Alegre: Editora da UFRGS, 2007. (Article orig. pub. 1987)
Cardoso, F.H. and E. Faletto. Dependency and Development in Latin
America. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979. (Orig. pub.
1972)
Social Science. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2007.
Fernandes, A. M. “Science and Dependent Development: How Success-
ful Is the Brazilian Case?” Paper presented at the World Congress of
Sociology, Madrid, 1990.
Freyre, G. China Tropical. São Paulo: Imprensa Oficial do Estado de
São Paulo, 2003.
Gibbs, W.W. “Lost Science in the Tropics.” American Scientist (August
1995): 76-83.
Liedke Filho, E. D. “A Sociologia no Brasil: História, Teorias, e
Desafios.” Sociologias 14 (2005).
Ortiz, R. Mundialização, Saberes, e Crenças. São Paulo: Brasiliense,
2006.
De Pina Cabral, J. “Língua e Hegemonia nas Ciências Sociais.” Análise
Social 182 (2007): 233-237.
Porto, M. S. G. and T. Dwyer. “Development, Dictatorship, and Rede-
mocratization: Trajectories of Brazilian Sociology.” In Sociological
Traditions, edited by S. Patel. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, forthcom-
ing.
De Sousa Santos, B. and M. P. Meneses. Epistemologias do Sul.
Coimbra: Almedina, 2009.
Schwartzman, S. “Catching Up in Science and Technology: Self-
Reliance or Internationalization?” Paper presented at the World
Congress of Sociology, Bielefeld, 1994.
Touraine, A. “Social Knowledge and the Multiplicity of Languages and
Cultures.” Report presented at the World Congress of Sociology,
Montreal, 1998.
Trindade, H. “Ciências Sociais no Brasil em Perspectiva: Fundação,
Consolidação e Expansão.” In As Ciências Sociais na América
Latina em Perspectiva Comparada 1930-2005, edited by H. Trindade
and G. de Sierra, pp 71-169. Porto Alegre: Editora da UFRGS, 2007.
The Dialogue between Criminology and the South’s Sociology of Violence 105
The Dialogue between Criminology and the

South’s Sociology of Violence:
The Policing Crisis and Alternatives
José-Vicente Tavares dos Santos, Federal University of Rio
Grande do Sul, Brazil
Since the 1980s, the structural changes of the capitalist mode of produc-
tion have produced a crime metamorphosis, the internationalization of
criminal organizations, and the social fabrication of violence. After the
“Age of Extremes” (Hobsbawm 1994), we might define the first period of
the twenty-first century, beginning in 1991, as the period of the Worldiza-
tion Process. 1 It can be characterized by an expansion of capitalistic ac-
tivities, global crisis, and the culture of post-modernity. This new period
can be summed up as the age of late modernity. 2
The last three decades, or late modernity, is a time of “liquid fear,”
because “fears are many and variable. People of different social, gender
and age categories are haunted by their own; there are also fears that we
all share – in whatever part of the globe we happen to have been born or
have chosen (or been forced) to live” (Bauman 2007: 20).
The world panorama is thus marked by social issues which express
themselves in articulated forms, but which manifest themselves in differ-
ently across societies. The present period is characterized by a combina-
tion of various elements: “the disembeddedness of everyday life, the
awareness of pluralism of values, and an individualism which presents
the achievement of self realization as an ideal” (Young 2007: 2). In late
modernity, society and contemporary states have difficulty coping with
the spread of diffuse violence (Giddens 1996). The social roots of these
acts of diffuse violence appear to be based on the processes of social
fragmentation: “the desegregation of the organizing principles of solidar-
1
The terms “worldization” and “globalization” are used in this article (the distinction is
an established one in Spanish, Portuguese, and French) to imply two different social
processes. “Globalization” means the internationalization of the world economic process.
“Worldization” is used to underline the social phenomena created by economic globaliza-
tion.
2
See Tavares dos Santos (2002).
106 José-Vicente Tavares dos Santos
ity, the crisis of the traditional conception of social rights to provide a

framework for thinking about the excluded” (Rosanvallon 1995: 9).
“Postmodern reality assumes the existence of insuperable conflicts”
(Bauman 1998: 32). Indeed, plurality, discontinuity, and dispersal are
aspects of advanced capitalism’s cultural logic. What occur are the phe-
nomena of “disaffiliation” and a breakdown of relations of otherness,
diluting the bond between oneself and the other (Castel 1998; Bauman
1998; Jameson 1996). Moreover, it is a society “where both inclusion and
exclusion occur concurrently – a bulimic society where massive cultural
inclusion is accompanied by systematic structural exclusion” (Young
2007: 32). Changes are taking place in social institutions, such as the
family, the school, the factory, religion, and the criminal justice system
(the police, courts, mental asylums, judiciaries, prisons), transforming
processes of socialization, as we go through a process of crisis and dein-
stitutionalization.
A worldwide landscape of insecurity emerges: “vertigo is the malaise
of late modernity: a sense of insecurity, of insubstantiality, and of uncer-
tainty, a whiff of chaos and a fear of falling” (Young 2007: 12). Conse-
quently, late modern societies produce transformations in crime and in
forms of violence. The phenomena of diffuse violence acquire new con-
tours and spread throughout society. The multiplicity of forms of diffuse
violence in contemporary societies, such as violent crime, social exclu-
sion, gender violence, acts of racism, and school violence, is expressed in
a microphysics of violence (Tavares dos Santos 2009). 3
Nevertheless, crime has changed in late modernity. According to
Jock Young, the definition of crime has become problematic for several
reasons: 1) today, aggressors are multiple, so the likelihood of becoming
a victim has come to seem normal; 2) the causes of crime are also wide-
spread; crime is part of the continuum of social normality, since its rela-
tionship with society is constitutive; 3) moreover, the space for action is
both public and private, and it occurs in social spaces that are in dispute –
residences, neighborhoods, plazas, private mass properties or streets; 4)
the relationship between the aggressors and the victims is complex – they
may be strangers or intimates, outsiders or members of the in-group; 5)
social control over crime is spread over multiple government agencies
and informal actions, including a strong presence of private security; 6)
the efficacy and efficiency of formal social control are problematic; 7)
finally, the public’s reaction is oriented by an irrational fear of crime and
a moral panic (Young 1999: 46). In this social world, “the dangerous and
3This notion is analogous of Foucault’s concept of the microphysics of power (Foucault

1994: 38-9).
oppressive trends in crime and crime control that have occurred in the last
three decades are fundamentally rooted in the political economy of neo-
liberalism policies, and its cultural and social concomitants” (Reiner 2008:
13). It can be explained by the fact that “neoliberalism is associated with
much greater inequality, long-term unemployment, and social exclusion”
(107).
We are in a civilizational malaise, which has shifted the focus of con-
temporary society to an obsessive preoccupation with individualism and
personal safety. Social inequality has become an important concept with
which to explain the social roots of this diffuse violence. For this reason,
we must answer the following question: what kinds of processes produce
the global outcomes of inequality that we are observing and experiencing?
(Therborn 2006)
Young people are particularly affected by the emphasis on individu-
alism, the narcissistic cult of individual freedom, all of which stimulates a
“winners” and “losers culture,” and which breaks the bonds of sociability.
However, youth relate with violence in an ambivalent manner: sometimes
as victims, and other times, as aggressors. In contemporary society, they
have fought to cohabit as well as to overcome violence. In fact, “the le-
thal combination is relative deprivation and individualism” (Young 1999:
48).
NEOLIBERALISM AND
THE ADMINISTRATIVE CRIMINOLOGY
In a political context where the influence of the USA and the UK, neolib-
eral economics, and neoconservative politics is strong, the neoliberal
model of coping with crime has created what we call “administrative
criminology.” This model “wanted to hold out deterrent penalties that
would be rigorously enforced and tough enough to act as real disincen-
tives to potentials offenders. Better, more vigorous policing and harsher,
more certain punishments were his preferred solution: more deterrence
and control, not more welfare” (Garland 2001: 59).
This orientation was compound by several elements. The right realist
approach has two dimensions: “first, it tends to take an individualized
view of crime, looking for explanations in individual choices rather than
in broader social or structural conditions; second, right realist responses
to the crime problem tend to be coached in terms of greater controls and
enhanced punishments” (Newburn 2007: 271).
The right realist position takes conventional legal definitions of crime
for granted, ignores the importance of the socioeconomics context in
explaining crime, even translating its principles into genetic and indi-
vidualists theories, and proposes that crime is caused by a lack of self-
control. It overemphasizes control and containment, accepts the fear of
crime as rational, and prioritizes order through deterrent and retributive
means of crime control. Indeed, “in the view of the right realists the
breakdown of moral values and social controls associated with permis-
siveness was central to understanding rising crime rates” (271).
Additionally, administrative criminology appeals to some concepts of
rational choice theory. Rational choice theory is premised “on the idea of
‘expected utility,’ assuming that individuals proceed on the basis of
maximizing profits and minimizing losses. A rational choice theory al-
lows the difficult question of criminal motivation to be reformulated as a
calculation – a balancing of cost and benefits” (NEWBURN 2007: 280-1).
Another scholar, Clarke explains that “…the rational choice model
regards criminal acts as calculated, utility maximizing conduct, resulting
from a straightforward process of individual choice. This model repre-
sents the problem of crime as matter of supply and demand, with punish-
ment operating as a price mechanism” (quoted in Garland 2001: 130).
Moreover, administrative criminology emphasizes control theories (15):
“Hirschi states that the common property of control theories at their sim-
plest level is their assumption that delinquency acts result when an indi-
vidual’s bond to society is weak or broken” (Downes and Rock 2007:
202). In a later version, Hirschi and Gottfredson proposed that
“crime…stems from low self-control: it provides an immediate, easy and
simple gratification of desires that is attractive to those who cannot or
will not defer enjoyment. It can be intrinsically pleasurable because it
involves the exercise of stealth, agility, deception, or power” (Downes
and Rock 2007: 202; Reiner 2008: 89).
Finally, there is the situational control approach which emphasizes
“the purely technical, cost benefit ratio aspects of crime: the opportunity
for crime available in the environment and the risks attached to criminal
activity” (Downes and Rock 2007: 209). Indeed, this “new administrative
criminology with its actuarial stance…reflects the rise of risk manage-
ment as a solution to the crime problem” (Young 1999: 27). So, “an actu-
arial approach is adopted which is concerned with the calculation of risk
rather than either individual guilt or motivation” (45). In others words,
“the actuarial stance is calculative of risk, it is wary and probabilistic, it is
not concerned with causes but with probabilities, not with justice but with
harm minimization, it does not seek a world free of crime but one where
the best practices of damage limitation have been put in place; not a uto-
pia but a series of gated havens in a hostile world” (66).
As Garland (2001) affirms, this administrative criminology is a “new

criminology of everyday life” premised on a “set of cognate theoretical
frameworks that includes routine activity theory, crime as opportunity,
lifestyle analysis, situational crime prevention, and some versions of ra-
tional choice theory” (128). He continues: “… the new approach identi-
fies recurring criminal opportunities and seeks to govern them by devel-
oping situational controls that will make them less tempting or less vul-
nerable. Criminogenic situations, ‘hot products’, ‘hot spots’ these are the
new objects of control” (129). Afterwards, “… the new criminology of
everyday life approaches social order as a problem of system integration.
(…) For these frameworks, social order is a matter of aligning and inte-
grating the diverse social routines and institutions that compose modern
society” (183).
The administrative criminology of neoliberalism period built up, dur-
ing the Reagan’s rule in the US (1981-1988) and the Thatcher mandate
(1979-1990) in the UK, a consensus about crime control with five core
elements: crime is public enemy number 1; there is an individual but not
a social responsibility for crime; victims are more important than offend-
ers; crime control works; and a high crime society is normal” (cf.
REINER 2008: 124-129). Since the 1980s, this “culture of control” has
been exported around the world (GARLAND 2001).
THE “BROKEN WINDOWS” POLICING MODEL

IN LATIN AMERICA
During the 1990s, the international transfer of information concerning

policing models from the US to Latin America had many forms of influ-
ence. Most notably, consultancy security firms were created and projects
financed by the US government were implemented. We shall discuss each
of these in the following sections.
Consultancy Security Firms
The beginning was the Manhattan Institute created in 1978 as a think-

tank organization. According to its website, “The Manhattan Institute has
been an important force in shaping American political culture and devel-
oping ideas that foster economic choice and individual responsibility. We
have supported and publicized research on our era's most challenging
public policy issues: taxes, health care, energy, the legal system, policing,
crime, homeland security, urban life, education, race, culture, and many
others. Our work has won new respect for market oriented policies and
helped make reform a reality” (Manhattan Institute).
The first famous work published by the Manhattan Institute was the
book by Charles Murray entitled Losing Ground in 1984. Tom Wolfe
(2003) reports that
the triumph of all triumphs was the now famous ‘Broken Windows’
strategy for reducing crime in big cities by first cracking down on the
quality of life misdemeanors that create an atmosphere of lawlessness.
Criminologist George Kelling and the famous political scientist James
Q. Wilson introduced the concept in an article in the March 1982 Atlan-
tic Monthly. (…)The quarterly's Summer 1992 issue ran an interview
by Kelling with New York's young Transit Police Chief William J.
Bratton about putting Broken Windows to the test in New York’s sub-
ways. That followed a forum called ‘Rethinking New York,’ starring
Kelling. (…). Rudy Giuliani came early stayed late and took notes. He
wanted to run for mayor in 1993.
George Kelling and James Q. Wilson wrote that “[t]o the extent that
this is the case, police administrators will continue to concentrate police
personnel in the highest crime areas (though not necessarily in the areas
most vulnerable to criminal invasion), emphasize their training in the law
and criminal apprehension (and not their training in managing street life),
and join too quickly in campaigns to decriminalize "harmless" behavior
(though public drunkenness, street prostitution, and pornographic dis-
plays can destroy a community more quickly than any team of profes-
sional burglars). Above all, we must return to our long abandoned view
that the police ought to protect communities as well as individuals. Our
crime statistics and victimization surveys measure individual losses, but
they do not measure communal losses. Just as physicians now recognize
the importance of fostering health rather than simply treating illness, so
the police and the rest of us ought recognize the importance of maintain-
ing, intact, communities without broken windows” (1982: 10).
To work in Latin America, they organized the “Inter American Policy
Exchange” so as “to foster increased contact, collaboration, and coopera-
tion among institutions and individuals in the Americas that will result in
benefits for both hemispheres. (…) The Inter American Policy Exchange
will build on the Manhattan Institute’s previous work in the countries of
Argentina, Brazil, and Chile and includes an expansion of our work to
Mexico and Venezuela.” A key project of this program was concerned
with crime and policing: “On numerous occasions we have brought Insti-
tute Senior Fellow George Kelling and former New York City Police
Commissioner William Bratton to Latin America to discuss the reforms

they helped institute in New York City that have resulted in a 65% reduc-
tion in serious crimes over the past eight years. (…) In addition to large
conferences attended by hundreds—sometimes thousands—of people,
these trips always include working meetings with police chiefs and top
government officials in each country. These meetings have now led to
formal consulting arrangements with governments in such places as Bue-
nos Aires, Argentina, Caracas, Venezuela and Fortaleza, Brazil to help
reform the way policing is done in Latin America” (Manhattan Institute).
Nevertheless, the message was spread not only to the South, but also
to Europe. Young reports trenchantly on a seminar at Westminster pro-
moted by the Institute for Economic Affairs, in London, in July of 1997,
addressed by Bratton which provoked mixed feelings: “The audience was,
to say the least, disappointed: they had come to hear that the simple and
the dramatic would work but had heard largely a story of common sense
laced with self-congratulation” (1999: 124).
Today, the main noticeable consultancy security firms are The Brat-
ton Group L.L.C., an international police-management consulting firm
created in 1996, and the Giuliani Partners L.L.C., founded in January
2002. These organizations are global security consulting firms, that origi-
nated from the New York City Police Department when Major Giuliani
chose William J. Bratton as New York City Police Commissioner (1994-
1996). Bratton coordinated a successful managerial reform, which was
inspired by J. Wilson’s “broken windows” approach, but was also based
on the fight against police corruption and the support of a dozen youth-
focused social projects.
This model of policing began to be exported to several countries. In
Britain, for example, they are used by the Home Office (Young 1999). In
addition, many foreign delegations came to the NYPD to be informed
about the model (SOARES 2000: 350-376; Maranhão Costa 2004: 145-
198). The same year Bratton was removed from his position. Immediately,
he founded The Bratton Group L.L.C., an international police-
management consulting firm. “From 1996 on, Chief Bratton worked in
the private sector, where he formed his own private consulting company,
The Bratton Group, L.L.C., working on four continents, including exten-
sive consulting in South America” (“Los Angelos”).
Bratton explains that
Latin America is the new frontier of reform for police work. Having
taken part in reforming U.S. police departments, including the New
York City Police Department, in the 1980s and 1990s, we see enormous
potential for the transformation of policing institutions in South Amer-
ica, Central America and Mexico that badly need the shakeup. The
good news is that with major efforts from government, business and
citizens, the turnaround is happening now. (…) Yet, as consultants in
the region over the past five years, we have seen many positive signs.
Political leaders notably Alfredo Pena, mayor of Caracas, and Tasso
Jereissati, Governor of Ceara State in northern Brazil has made pro-
found changes in their police departments. (…) Much of Latin Amer-
ica's policing problem is a problem of scale. The region's cities have
grown and changed rapidly, but police departments have not grown and
changed with them. (…). The military model followed by so many
Latin American police agencies further compounds the problem. Ac-
customed to military style operations, Latin American police have de-
veloped little competence in two essential police functions: preventive
patrol and investigation. (Bratton and Andrews 2001).
Since October 2002, Bratton has been the Chief of the Los Angeles
Police Department.
The other global consultancy security firm is Giuliani Partners L.L.C.,
founded by Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York, in
January 2002. The firm’s mission expresses commitment “to helping
leaders solve critical strategic issues, accelerate growth, and enhance the
reputation and brand of their organizations in the context of strongly held
values.” One of the five principles of the firm is “Preparedness”: “The
public and private sectors face a multitude of risks and challenges stem-
ming from terrorism, crime, natural disasters, market performance, and
countless other factors that threaten an organization’s ability to survive.
Governments are already taking steps to protect civilians and businesses
from the effects of a variety of threats. The private sector can do more to
prepare to secure its personnel, assets, and future. Relentless preparation
develops a culture of responsibility and awareness” (“Giuliani Partners”).
The firm has advised business and government agencies on security,
leadership, and other issues, in the US as well as in Trinidad and Mexico
City, in 2003. The New York Times reported in 2003 that
Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York and possibly the
world’s best paid crime fighting consultant, ended his first working tour
of Mexico City today, after a 36-hour whirlwind of mean streets and
chic suites. (…) Mr. Giuliani will seek ways to cut crime in Mexico
City, and he promises ideas in four months, results in four years. His
visit was the talk of the town, but not so much for his thoughts on civi-
lizing the capital. It was the $4.3 million his firm is pocketing that at-
tracted attention, along with the security cordon that surrounded him:
about 400 officers, a force far greater than that usually accorded foreign
potentates, presidents or pop stars. (…). His promise to come up with
crime-busting concepts is being taken with a grain of salt in Mexico
City, by citizens and the police alike. (Weiner 2003)
The main orientation of these consulting security firms is to propose

“the policies and practices through which American interests and priori-
ties are exported around the globe.” But, “the fact that several of the most
prominent of these firms so aggressively promote the ‘New York Police
Department model’ is also controversial. This model is the approach to
crime and disorder taken in New York City under Mayor Giuliani based
on a particular interpretation of ‘broken windows policing.’ This model
justified especially aggressive law enforcement approach to a number of
urban social problems. It is this law enforcement approach that has been
exported by leading transnational security consulting firms” (Mitchell
and Beckett 2008). In fact, these firms have advised many big cities in
Latin America, including Mexico City, Mexico Caracas, Venezuela, For-
taleza and Ceara, Brazil and Santiago, Chile.
In the Brazilian case, the Governor of the State of Ceara, Tasso Jere-
issati, made a contract with the “First Security Consulting,” coordinated
by Mr. Bratton, in 1997. The project’s purpose was to foster the activities
of police integration, with an urban design of “models districts of public
security” where all the states’ agencies could work together (Barreira
2004: 10).
The “law and order” discourse, in particular, New York’s “zero toler-
ance” policy had been imported by conservative political sectors in many
Latin American cities, but only in reference to reinforcement of police
presence on the streets, the fight against petty crime, but without any
attempt to recreate the entire network of associative services which was a
part of the original program in New York.
An evaluation of these international policing policies concluded that
“[t]he overarching goal of American assistance to foreign police is clear –
to safeguard the United States from criminal activity from abroad.” How-
ever, the theory of international cooperation seems very clear to Bayley
(2006). According to him, “[i]t is based on the theory that crime is most
effectively controlled by punishment. American programs give hardly
any attention to alternative strategies…” (128-129).
United States Government International Programs
The relationship between the US’s main political agenda and the build up
of policing in Latin America has been well documented since the late
twentieth century (Huggins 1998). However, over the last three decades,
it is relevant to note the application of US political interests in distinct
levels of regional power, not necessarily due to the political demands of
the foreign country receiving these programs (Bayley 2006). On the other
hand, there is bilateral cooperation over the “Drug War,” specifically
Plan Colombia (since 2002) and the Merida Plan (since 2008). 4 In addi-
tion, policing schools have been established abroad, a strategy that merits
detailed discussion here.
The International Law Enforcement Academy (ILEA) was created in
1995, by the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC), an
interagency law enforcement training organization that has serviced over
87 US federal agencies since 1970, and the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) since 2003 (“Federal Law”). Several academies have
been established around the world including in Budapest, Hungary (1995),
in Bangkok, Thailand (1999), in Gaborone, Botswana (2001), in San
Salvador, El Salvador (2005), and a Regional Training Center in Lima,
Peru (2005).
The FLETC mission is to “train those who protect our homeland” by
“provid[ing] fast, flexible, and focused training to secure and protect
America. They share, for example, the United Kingdom Home Office
orientations of “Problem Oriented Approach to Crime Reduction”: “The
PSU [Police Support Unit] trains their police force and analysts to look at
the cause of the problem for the purposes of reducing the opportunity for
the problem to reoccur” (“London Metropolitan Police”).
In addition, the FLETC uses SARA (Scanning, Analysis, Response,
and Assessment), a problem solving model used in these type of strate-
gies. The International Law Enforcement Academy is dedicated “to sup-
port emerging democracies, help protect U.S. interests through interna-
tional cooperation and to promote social, political and economic stability
by combating crime.” The ILEA’s objectives are “to support regional and
local criminal justice institutional and law enforcement building; to facili-
tate strengthened partnerships among countries in regions served by the
ILEAS aiming to address the problems with drugs and crime; to provide
high quality training and technical assistance in formulating strategies
and tactics for foreign law enforcement personnel; to improve coordina-
tion, foster cooperation, and, as appropriate, to facilitate the harmoniza-
tion of law enforcement activities within regions, in a manner compatible
with the U.S. interests; to foster cooperation by foreign law enforcement
4 Plan Colombia’s full title is the Plan for Peace, Prosperity, and the Strengthening of the
State and is described at
http://www.usip.org/library/pa/colombia/adddoc/plan_colombia_101999.html. The Me-
rida Initiative is described at http://search.state.gov.
authorities with U.S. law enforcement entities engaged in coping with the
organized crime and the other criminal investigations; to assist foreign
law enforcement entities in the professionalization of their forces in a cost
effective manner; and to build linkages between U.S. law enforcement
entities and future criminal justice leadership in participating countries, as
well as among regional participants with one another.” For example, the
San Salvador Academy “has as its objectives, supporting criminal justice
institution building and strengthening partnerships among the regions'
law enforcement community. The training focus is on transnational
crimes, human rights and the rule of law with emphasis on trafficking in
narcotics, trafficking in persons, terrorism, money laundering and other
financial crimes” (“Federal Law”).
STRUCTURAL VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA:

HOW TO OVERCOME ADMINISTRATIVE CRIMINOLOGY
Latin American societies show an increasing structural form of violence

that demands a new framework for the sociology of violence and policing.
The globalization process, particularly neoliberal policies has led to the
creation of social structures determined by exclusion, and has provoked
new social conflicts and sometimes posed constraints on the consolida-
tion of democracy in this part of the periphery of the capitalist world sys-
tem (Tavares dos Santos 2002: 123).
Violence as a new global social issue is provoking changes in the
state. We are seeing contemporary forms of social control having the
characteristics of a repressive social control. The “penal social control
state” is growing more attractive in late modern societies, and it is ac-
companied by a systematic appeal to the use of illegal and illegitimate
violence (Melossi 1992; Pavarini and Pegoraro 1995; Wacquant 1998: 7-
26).
A general crisis of institutional social control has supplemented the
democratic transition processes in Latin America. This crisis has included
police brutality, difficulty in accessing the justice system, the social se-
lectivity of criminal justice, and prison conditions; in sum, it has entailed
a loss of legitimacy of formal social control (Pinheiro et al 2000). These
elements of the culture of control in Latin America have many dimen-
sions and characteristics. First, there is the social production of the para-
dox of insecurity such that “[a]n increasing obsession with security prac-
tices and paraphernalia, even if successful in reducing crime, can exacer-
bate the sense of insecurity by acting as reminders of danger” (Reiner
2008: 115). Second, there is extreme brutality and corruption in police
departments in peripheral countries of the capitalist world system (Chevi-

gny 1995). Third, there has been an expansion of private security firms,
especially ones that do vigilante work in places of “mass private prop-
erty.” Fourth, there is currently mass imprisonment, mainly of young men
who belong to the “underclass” or to stigmatized ethnic minorities (Wac-
quant 2000). Police officers’ education and their tendency to discriminate
on the basis of gender and ethnicity continues to be a huge problem today.
Last, but certainly not least, many have observed police officers’ lack of
respect for human rights in their everyday practices.
Finally, there is the selectivity of the judicial system, the barbarity of
the prisons as atrocious warehouses for men (increasingly becoming an
issue as well as for female offenders), the new forms of electronic vigi-
lance that threaten democracy and individual and collective freedom (Ta-
vares dos Santos 2000; Wacquant 2000). In Argentina and Brazil, there is
a discrepancy in the justice system, from the criminal legislation to the
prison system, problems in the functioning of institutions responsible for
preventing and coping with crime, and the increase in crime control, in
other words, in “the loss of legitimacy of the system, its high degree of
selectivity and authoritarianism” (Azevedo 2008).
THE PARADOX OF ABSTRACT CRIMINOLOGICAL

MODELS AND EMPIRIC CHAOS: THE POLICING CRISIS IN
LATE MODERNITY
The crisis of policing is configured analytically by a series of theoretical

and political insufficiencies, and constitutes one of the new global social
issues that has manifested itself in several geographic zones. In the U.S.,
the crisis of legitimacy began in the 1970s. According to Weisburd and
Braga (2006), “[t]his was the case in part because of the tremendous so-
cial unrest that characterized the end of the previous decade. Race riots in
American cities, and growing opposition, especially among younger
Americans, to the Vietnam War, often placed the police in conflict with
the young and with minorities” (4).
In the United Kingdom, by the 1980s, “the police were subject to a
storm of political conflict and controversy. During the 1984 -1985 min-
ers’ strike they were in equal measure reviled by the Left and revered by
the Right. (…). In the early 1990s, there was a growing consensus be-
tween political and police elites about the need to reform policing in a
community-oriented direction, aiming to ensure efficiency and quality of
service” (Reiner 2000: IX).
In Latin America, the political difficulties of policing results from the

processes of democratic transition, during the last twenty years: the ef-
forts to institutionally reconstruct law enforcement in the post-
dictatorship era (Frubling and Candina 2001).
The configuration of the police issue as one of the new global social
questions can be witnessed in the record of several international meetings,
ranging from the Human Rights Conference (in Vienna, in 1993, pro-
moted by the UN) to the IX World Social Forum (in Belem do Para, Bra-
zil, in January 2009).
The debates have centered on the following themes: transformations
in contemporary society that began in 1990 with the changes in the forms
of crime, including the expansion of diffuse violence and the spread of
violence against women, children, old people and ethnic minority and
sexual groups; the violation of human rights and the victimization of the
poor, the young, and ethnic minorities; the strengthening of civil society
and the involvement of local collectivity with human rights and the right
to security; and the consequences of these changes on police organiza-
tions. The aspects of police organizations that have been affected by these
transformations include police management, the experiences of commu-
nity police and charges of police brutality, the education of police officers,
and the new consortia with universities (Tavares dos Santos 2009).
In sum, these conferences have reached conclusions that are critical
of authoritarian and violent police conduct and endorsing the political
intention to move towards other kinds of policing.
The age of late modernity has shown an increasing crisis of policing
(Reiner 2000: 216; Wright 2002; Bayley 1994). An important piece of
evidence for this crisis is the fact that “[o]n the one hand, extensive mal-
practice has begun to undermine the status and effectiveness of the pro-
fessional public police. On the other hand, a more community-based po-
lice seem as yet unable to meet the needs of a diversity of cultures or to
be able to control extremes of deviance”(Wright 2002: 16; see also
Bayley 1994: 11).
In this context, it is quite important to summarize the debate about
the four police models that are in dispute in the contemporary field of
social control and policing.
Community policing involves strategies of decentralized action that
enable police to work locally with problems and solutions, focusing on
social integration and mediation of interpersonal conflicts on a local level
(Kádár 2001, point 8; Comité Europeén 2000: 150, 144; Reiner 2000: 10;
Young 1999; Weisburd and Braga 2006: 27-73). According to Bailey,
community policing aims to prevent crime. Policing is done by a
“neighborhood police officer,” who would be “community based in a
double sense.” First, “they would be based in communities, rather than

entering them episodically in response to calls for service.” Moreover,
“the problems they handle would be those based on community condi-
tions” (Bayley 1994: 147; see also Dias Neto 2000).
Management theory is premised on the ideas of “total quality” bor-
rowed from the business principles of management for the “new public
management” (Wright 2002: 160 - 166). Here, the orientation of the po-
lice work is different, because “the adoption of the language of consum-
erism in late modern policing is already clear, through the discourse of
‘services’… Police carry out surveys mainly to establish customer satis-
faction” (Wright 2002: 174). Frequently, this approach was completed
with “third-party policing” (Weisburd and Braga 2006: 191-221).
Tough police confirms a “law and order” point of view about policing
in the late modernity societies: “The nubs of my conclusion are that all
the reform initiatives of recent years have been vitiated by a failure to
reject the ‘law and order’ framework, and to recognize the inherent limi-
tations of the policing. They have been fatally damaged by government
policies which aggravated unemployment and exclusion, especially
among the young and ethnic minorities, creating problems of policing in
a new and growing underclass” (Reiner,2000: 10). It means the demand
for a tough police, directed by the notion “zero tolerance” in North Amer-
ica, Latin America and Europe (Reiner 2000: 1112; Comité Europeén
2000: 144; Kádár 2001: 9-10; Bayley 1994: 143; Young 1999: 123-124;
Weisburd and Braga 2006: 77-114). Indeed, in New York City, the crime
mapping and the statistical analyses used by the police – the COMP-
STAT – became a global innovation in police management (Weisburd
and Braga 2006: Part VII, p. 267-301).
The Citizenship Police: Late modern policing is concerned with
peacekeeping, conflict management, criminal investigation, risk man-
agement, and the promotion of community justice (Wright 2002: XIII,
177). Police organizations sometimes use new approaches to better their
relationship, communication, and reciprocity with civil society (Wright
2002: 175). This model necessarily respects the lawful democratic state,
approving “professional rules” for the police who keep the balance be-
tween “freedom and security” (Kádár 2001: point 3, 7; Comité Europeén
2000: 13, 144, 150; see also Bauman 2006).
We could then think about the construction of a world citizenship,
oriented to the prevention and eradication of forms of diffuse violence
and the construction of another ideal type of police, the Citizenship Po-
lice.
The feature of the reform being discussed includes accountability to
the community, proximity, social conflict mediation, and shapes the field
of a democratic social control (Rolim 2006). This is a social field in

which different agents of social control participate (police officers, judges,
lawyers, prison managers, social scientists, and journalists). They share
their theoretical, technical, and political stands in order to develop the
practices, the forms of police organizations, and the right to security in
the new century (Tavares dos Santos 2004: 89-106).
THE SOCIOLOGY OF VIOLENCE AND THE ALTERNATIVES

OF POLICING
“The crisis in criminology is a crisis of modernity” (Young 1999: 32),

derived from five majors challenges: “the rise in the crime rate; the reve-
lation of hitherto invisible victims; the problems of what is crime nowa-
days; the growing awareness of the universality of crime and the selectiv-
ity of justice; and the problematization of punishment and culpability”
(34).
Arguably, there has been a change in contemporary sociological
thought which aims to provide explanations for and solve social prob-
lems of our times. Such a trend is particularly notable in the sociology of
violence in France (Wievorka 2004), the US (Collins 2008), and strongly
in Latin America (Adorno 1999; Zaluar 2004; Misse 2006; Grossiporto
2006; Barreira 2008; Tavares dos Santos 2009). These sociological tradi-
tions combine empirical research, theoretical explanations, and social
commitment.
This heritage is an intellectual work about modes of domination, so-
cial control, social conflicts, and about the invention of new social institu-
tions. Consequently, we would like to contribute to the sociology of vio-
lence, while also fostering a critical approach that could help to go be-
yond the fears of late modernity.
The emergence of collective action and institutional initiatives is the
expression of a movement against violence. That movement has been, on
the one hand, a multiplication of plans to prevent violence and reduce
violent crime, viewed as new alternatives for public security policies
capable of guaranteeing the citizens’ right to security. On the other hand,
it is the expression of a collaborative effort between public universities
and the state which has been advantageous, indicating a movement to-
wards the transformation of the curricula, the content, and the conceptu-
alization of the police officer’s role.
Thus, in Latin America, certain processes are evident: a) the crisis of
effectiveness and legitimacy faced by the police but which has not elic-
ited any reform initiatives (Mexico, Venezuela, Bolivia, Peru and Ecua-
dor); b) the creation of new police institutions in countries that have suf-
fered civil wars (such as in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua); par-
tial reforms in Argentina (Província of Buenos Aires), Uruguay, and Co-
lombia; communitarian police initiatives (in Chile and Brazil); programs
of police education organized by public universities (as in Brazil, Argen-
tina, and Província of Buenos Aires ) (Tavares dos Santos 2009; Dam-
mert and Bailey 2005; Bobbea 2003; Brinceno Leon 2002; Tagle 2002;
Coronado, Rivelois and Moloeznik 2004; Arcon 2003; Chevigny 1995;
Cels 2004; Pegoraro 1999; Frubling and Candina 2001, 2004; Gabaldon
and Birbeck 2006; Carranza 1997; Huggins 1998; Soares 2000; Maran-
hão Costa 2004; Pinheiro, Mendez and O’Donnell 2000; Quintana Ta-
borda 2005).
In other words, in the worldization framework, the emergence of the
concept of citizen security assumes the social construction of a democ-
ratic, nonviolent, and transcultural police organization, which returns to
the objective of policing as part of a democratic governmentality. There
is a visibility to and a conceptualization of the importance of social strug-
gles against the worldization of injustice, as a form of resistance. These
small scale and plural struggles also have a positive dimension as well,
for they are negations of the forms of exercise of domination. We find
new agents of resistance; the social movements confront the centrality of
state power over social space-time, but in doing so, these movements
affirm the cartography of small experiences in search of a rearrangement
of the social world. As IX World Social Forum stated in Belem do Para,
Brazil, February 2009: “another world is possible” for a “good living.”
So, Latin American societies should implement a policing that is
concerned with the practices of emancipation, and that communicates, in
everyday life, with the practices of social groups, of all genders, ethnic
origins, and ages. The noteworthy theme is to include the collective secu-
rity of citizens in a complex of civil, political, and social rights.
The emergence of a notion of citizenship police, within the perspec-
tive of worldization, entails the social construction of a policing oriented
to human dignity and equity, on a worldwide scale. Citizenship policing
could be a mode of participation in the collective fabric of the sociologi-
cal imagination about violence and policing in the future.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adorno, S. “Violência e Civilização.” In A Sociologia para o Século

XXI edited by J. V. Tavares dos Santos and A. Gugliano, pp. 77-106.
Pelotas, Brazil: EDUCAT, 1999.
Barreira, C. Cotidiano Despedaçado: Cenas de uma Violência Difusa.

São Paulo, Brazil: Pontes, 2008.
Barreira, C., et al. Questão de Segurança. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil:
Relume Dumará, 2004.
Bauman, Z. O Mal Estar da Pós-Modernidade. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil:
Jorge Zahar, 1998.
-----. Liquid Fear. Cambridge: Polity, 2006.
Bayley, D. Police for the Future. New York: Oxford University Press,
1994.
-----. Changing the Guard: Developing Democratic Police Abroad. New
York: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Bobbea, L. Entre Crimen y el Castigo: Seguridad Ciudadana y Control
Democrático en America Latina y el Caribe. Caracas, Venezuela:
Nueva Sociedad, 2003.
Bourdieu, P. Raisons Pratiques: Sur la Théorie de L'action. Paris,
France: Seuil, 1994.
Bratton, W. and W. Andrews. “Driving Out the Crime Wave: The Police
Methods that Worked in New York City Can Work in Latin Amer-
ica.” July 23, 2001. http://www.manhattaninstitute.org (accessed Au-
gust 1, 2009).
Briceno L. R., ed. Violencia, Sociedad, y Justicia en America Latina.
Buenos Aires, Argentina: CLACSO, 2002.
Carranza, E. Delito y Seguridad de los Habitantes. México: Siglo XXI,
1997.
Carrion, F., ed. Seguridad Ciudadana: Espejismo o Realidad? Quito,
Ecuador: FLACSO, 2002.
Castel, R. As Metamorfoses da Questão Social. Petrópolis, Brazil:
Vozes, 1998.
Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS). Políticas de Seguridad
Ciudadana y Justicia Penal. Buenos Aires, Argentina: CELS, 2004.
Chevigny, P. Edge of the Knife: Police Violence in the Americas. New
York: New Press, 1995.
Collins, R. Violence: A Micro-Sociological Theory. Princeton: Princeton
Comité Europeén pour les Problèmes Criminels. Les Pouvoirs et
Responsabilités de la Police dans une Société Démocratique.
Strasbourg: Conseil d´Europe, 2000.
Coronado, J., J. Rivelois, and M.P. Moloeznik. Criminalización de los
Poderes, Corrupción y Tráfico de Drogas. Guadalajara, Mexico:
Universidad de Guadalajara, 2004.
Dammert, L. and J. Bailey. “Police Force Reform and Military Participa-

tion against Delinquency.” Revista Fuerzas Armadas y Sociedad
1(Jan./June 2005): 133-152.
Dias Neto, T. Policiamento Comunitário e Controle sobre a Polícia: a
Experiência Norte-Americana. São Paulo: IBCCRIM, 2000.
Downes, D. M. and P. Rock. Understanding Deviance: a Guide to the
Sociology of Crime and Rule Breaking. 5th ed. New York: Oxford
Elias, N. O Processo Civilizador: Uma História dos Costumes, Vol. I.
Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar, 1990.
Elias, N. O Processo Civilizador: Formação do Estado e Civilização,
Vol. II. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar, 1993.
“Federal Law Enforcement Training Center.” http://www.fletc.gov (ac-
cessed August 1, 2009).
Foucault, M. Dits et Ecrits. Paris, France: Gallimard, 1994.
Frubling, H and A. Candina. Policía, Sociedad y Estado: Modernización
y Reforma Policial en America del Sul. Santiago de Chile: Centro de
Estudios para el Desarrollo (CED), 2001.
-----. Polícia, Participación Ciudadana y Reformas a la Policía en
América del Sur. Santiago de Chile, Chile: Centro de Estudios para el
Desarrollo (CED), 2004.
Gabaldon, L. G. and C. H. Birbeck. Policía y Fuerza Física. Caracas,
Venezuela: Nueva Sociedad, 2003.
Garland, D. Punishment and Modern Society. Oxford: Clarendon, 1990.
-----. The Culture of Control. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Giddens, A. Sociology. Cambridge: Polity, 1989.
Giddens, A. Para Além da Esquerda e da Direita. São Paulo: UNESP,
1996.
“Giuliani Partners.” http://www.giulianipartners.com (accessed August 1,
2009).
Grossi Porto, M.S. “Elementos para uma Reflexão sobre Violência no
Brasil dos Anos 90.” Educação e Sociedade 15, no. 48 (2006): 326-
337.
Helksinki Commission. Polices in Democratic Transition. Budapest:
CDROM, 1998.
Hobsbawm, E. The Age of Extremes: a History of the World 1914-1991.
New York: Pantheon Books, 1994.
Huggins, M. K. Polícia e Política: Relações Estados Unidos /América
Latina. São Paulo: Cortez, 1998.
Huggins, M. K., et al. Violence Workers: Police Torturers and
Murderers Reconstruct Brazilian Atrocities. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press, 2002.
Jameson, F. Pós-Modernismo: a Lógica Cultural do Capitalismo Tardio.

São Paulo, Brazil: Ática, 1996.
Kádár, A. Police in Transition: Essays on the Police Forces in Transi-
tion Countries. Budapest, Hungary: Central European University
Press, 2001.
Kaminsky, G. Tiempos Inclementes: Culturas Policiales y Seguridad
Ciudadana. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Universidad de Lanús, 2005.
Kelling, G. L. and C. Coles. Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order
and Reducing Crime in Our Communities. New York: Free Press,
1996.
“London Metropolitan Police.” http://www.met.police.uk (accessed Au-
gust 1, 2009).
“Los Angelos Police Department.” http://www.lapdonline.org (accessed
August 1, 2009).
Maguire, M., R. Morgan and R. Reiner. The Oxford Handbook of Crimi-
nology. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994
Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. “Manhattan Institute for Policy
Research.” http://www.manhattaninstitute.org (accessed August 1,
2009).
Maranhão Costa, A. T. Entre a Lei e a Ordem. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil:
FGV, 2004.
Martin, G. and M. Ceballos. Bogotá: Anatomía de una Transformación:
Políticas de Seguridad Ciudadana 1995 - 2003. Bogotá, Colombia:
Editorial Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, 2004.
Melossi, D. El Estado del Control Social. Madrid, Spain: Siglo
Veintiuno de España, 1992.
Misse, M. Crime e Violência no Brasil Contemporâneo. Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil: Lumen Juris, 2006.
Mitchell, K. and K. Beckett. “Securing the Global City: Crime, Consult-
ing, Risk, and Ratings in the Production of Urban Space.” Indiana
Journal of Global Legal Studies (2008).
Muncie, J, E. McLaughlin and M. Langan, eds. Criminogical Perspec-
tives. London: SAGE, 2001.
Murray, C. “The Underclass.” In Criminological Perspectives, edited by J.
Muncie, E. Mclaughlin and M. Langan, pp. 120-135. London: Sage,
2001.
Newburn, T. Criminology. Willan: Devon, 2007.
Pagon, M., ed. Policing in Central and Eastern Europe. Ljubljana: Col-
lege of Police and Security Studies, 1996.
Pavarini, M. and J. Pegoraro. El Control Social en el Fin del Siglo.
Buenos Aires: Universidad de Buenos Aires, 1995.
Pegoraro, J. “Inseguridad y Violencia en el Marco del Control Social.”

In Violências no Tempo da Globalização, edited by J. V. Tavares-
dos-Santos, pp. 201-228. São Paulo: Hucitec, 1999.
Pinheiro, P. S., J. E. Mendez and G. O’Donnell. Democracia, Violência e
Injustiça. São Paulo: Paz e Terra, 2000.
Quintana Taborga, J. R. Policía y Democracia en Bolivia. La Paz: PIEB,
2005.
Reiner, R. The Politics of the Police. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2000.
-----. Law and Order. Cambridge: Polity, 2008.
Rico, J. M. and L. Chinchilla. Seguridad Ciudadana en America Latina.
México: Siglo XXI, 2002.
Rolim, M. A Síndrome da Rainha Vermelha: Policiamento e Segurança
Pública no Século XXI. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar, 2006.
Rosanvallon, P. La Nouvelle Question Sociale. Paris: Seuil, 1995.
Sain, M. F. Seguridad, Democracia y Reforma del Sistema Policial en
Argentina. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2002.
Soares, L. E. Meu Casaco de General. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras,
2000.
Sousa Santos, B. A Crítica da Razão Indolente: Contra o Desperdício da
Experiência. São Paulo: Cortez, 2000.
Tagle, F. T. El Sistema de Justicia Penal en la Ciudad de México.
México: FCE, 2002.
Tavares-dos-Santos, J. V., ed. Violências em Tempo de Globalização.
São Paulo: Hucitec, 1999.
Tavares-dos-Santos, J. V. “The World Police Crisis and the Construction
of Democratic Policing.” International Review of Sociology 14
(2004): 89-106.
Tavares-dos-Santos, J. V. “The Worldization of Violence and Injustice.”
Current Sociology 50, no. 1 (2002):123-134.
Tavares-dos-Santos, J. V. Violências e Conflitualidades. Porto Alegre:
TOMO, 2009.
Taylor, I. Crime in Context. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999.
Taylor, I, P. Wallon and J. Young. Criminología Crítica. México: Siglo
XXI, 1977.
Therborn, G, ed. Inequalities of the World: New Theoretical Frameworks,
Multiple Empirical Approaches. London: Verso, 2006.
Van Swaaningen, R. Critical Criminology: Visions from Europe.
London: SAGE, 1997.
Wacquant, L. Punir os Pobres: a Nova Gestão da Miséria nos Estados
Unidos. Rio de Janeiro: REVAN, 2007.
Wacquant, L. “L’Ascension de l’Etat Pénal en Amérique.” Actes de la

Recherche en Sciences Sociales (1998): 7–26.
Wacquant, L. Las Cárceles de la Miseria. Buenos Aires: Manantial,
2000.
Weiner, T. “Enter Consultant Giuliani, His Fee Preceding Him.” The New
York Times, January 16, 2003. http://www.nytimes.com (accessed
August 1, 2009).
Wiesburd, D. and A. A. Braga. Policing Innovation: Contrasting Per-
spectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Wiewiorka, M. La Violence. Paris: Balland, 2004.
Wilson, J. Q. and G. L. Kelling. “The Police and Neighborhood Safety:
Broken Windows.” The Atlantic Monthly 249, no. 3 (March 1982).
Wolfe, T. “Revolutionaries: on how the Manhattan Institute Changed
New York City and America.” New York Post, January 30, 2003.
Wright, A. Policing: An Introduction to Concepts and Practice. Cul-
lompton, Devon: Willan Publishing, 2002.
Young, J. The Exclusive Society. London: Sage, 1999.
Young, J. The Vertigo of Late Modernity. London: Sage, 2007.
Zaluar, A. Integração Perversa: Pobreza e Tráfico de Drogas. Rio de
Janeiro: FGV, 2004.
126 Jorge Carrillo
Challenges for and Practices

in the Sociology of Work in Mexico:
Between Global Paradigms and
Local Development Paradigms
Jorge Carrillo, El Colegio de la Frontera Norte (COLEF), Mexico1
The field of sociology of work in Mexico (henceforth, SWM) is relatively

new, having started in the early 1980s. It has made important advances in
its almost thirty years and has solidified into a highly productive and pro-
fessionally well-organized sub-discipline both in Mexico and in the rest
of Latin America, and not only in sociology. Currently, an association,
an academic journal, and at least one solid postgraduate program are
dedicated to the sociology of work in Mexico. Mexico’s connections in
Latin America have led it to be selected to host the Latin American Con-
gress on the sociology of work for the second time. However, in spite of
these capable institutional entities and the networks that have been built,
SWM faces strong limitations and serious challenges, as we will see
throughout the course of this document.
This paper analyzes the practices, challenges, and limitations of the
sociology of work in Mexico. In particular, and as an example, this
document will look at the study of industrial models, which, in addition
to being the SW topic most studied during the 1980s and 90s in this coun-
try, is without a doubt the topic subjected to most analysis and that has
aroused the most debate. The paper is divided into five sections: intro-
duction, institutionalization of the profession, context and practices, pro-
ductive models and local development of ideas, and conclusion.
INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THE SOCIOLOGY OF WORK

AS A PROFESSION
The sociology of work in Latin America, and specifically in Mexico, was
1
Jorge Carrillo would like to thank Joselito Fernandez for his assistance in writ-
ing this document. Dr. Carrillo can be reached at [email protected]. His web-
site is www.colef.mx/jorgecarrillo/multinacionales/.
Challenges for and Practices in the Sociology of Work in Mexico 127
institutionally established in the late 1980s and since then has evolved
both institutionally and thematically, consolidating its own identity
(Abramo et al. 1998). A large body of research exists in the area, particu-
larly in Mexico, due to the importance of labor and its influence on the
primary social structures (Muro 2007: 541).
Studies on social problems abound, and studies are being developed
on labor and the organizational processes of companies and institutions
specific to the Mexican experience and that of each regional context stud-
ied. These studies are based on sociological, anthropological, demo-
graphic, and economic approaches, broadening the range of knowledge
on labor. However, despite the wealth of said interdisciplinarity, social
research in Mexico does not yet approach sufficient theoretical depth and
internationalization; instead, it predominantly produces studies of practi-
cal, descriptive, and local character. Nevertheless, this research has
evolved toward greater diversity of approaches and methodologies.
Contributions to this field have taken shape in the Latin American
Congresses held since 1993 and in forums, researcher networks, associa-
tions, and publications such as the “Latin American Sociology Treaty”
(“Tratado Latinoamericano de Sociología”) and “The Sitation of Work
in Mexico” (“La Sitación del Trabajo en México”) (De la Garza 2001; de
la Garza and Salas 2003). Local and national empirical studies have
made particularly important contributions. According to one of the most
prestigious labor sociologists at the international level, Juan José Castillo
(1997), research in Latin America is “first rate,” with important empirical
contributions carried out in the past three decades. This has made the
academic debate generated in Latin America enter into the international
level with strength and personality.
Institutionalization
To summarize, I will highlight four organizations that speak to the

strength of the sociology of work in Mexico and demonstrate the institu-
tionalization of the profession.
First, the Latin American Association of the Sociology of Work
(Asociación Latinoamericana de la Sociología del Trabajo, ALAST) was
launched in 1991. At that time, a group of sociologists of work who had
informally gathered at the end of a seminar in Mexico City decided to
form a professional association at the Latin American level. Their first
Congress was held in November 1993. Since then, the ALAST Congress
is held every three years in different countries (so far including Mexico,
Brazil, Argentina, Cuba, and Uruguay). In 2009, Mexico served as host
for the second time, with the sixth ALAST Congress taking place on May
128 Jorge Carrillo
19-22. 2 The ALAST Congresses bring together between 400 and 500
participants from the American continents. Since 1995, ALAST has also
published a Latin American Journal on Labor Studies called the Latin
American Journal of Labor Studies (Revista Latinoamericana de Estu-
dios del Trabajo, RLET), with 19 issues published to date. This journal
has an itinerant character corresponding to the sites of the Congresses. In
2003, the assembly decided that the journal could be hosted by a country
distinct from that of the Congress site, due to the financial difficulties that
may be faced by the Congress host country. Since 2006, Mexico has
served as ALAST headquarters while the journal is edited in Venezuela
in response to the lack of financial and human capacity in Mexico to pro-
duce two journals on the same theme.
Second, the Mexican Association of Labor Studies (Asociación
Mexicana de Estudios del Trabajo, AMET) was founded in 1996 as part
of the ALAST strategy to foster national associations. The first Mexican
Congress on the sociology of work was held that year in Guadalajara.
The goal of AMET is to promote labor studies in Mexico and to foster
collaboration among its members, with particular emphasis on promoting
the diversity of theories, approaches, and problems within the field of
labor studies, not only from sociology but also from related labor disci-
plines and sub-disciplines such as anthropology, economics, law, history,
and administration, among others. AMET organizes its national congress
every two years in alternating cities (Guadalajara, Mexico City, Puebla,
Hermosillo, Oaxtepec, and Querétaro), chaired by an executive commit-
tee that also rotates. The assembly of all AMET members holds session
at each Congress and is the decision-making body. Between approxi-
mately 250 and 300 professionals participate in each Congress. The vol-
ume of participants varies depending on the economic situation in the
country and the capacity of the organizing group. AMET has just under
100 professors-researchers and postgraduate students as regular members.
The inscription fee is paid at the Congresses themselves and is around
US$50 including membership and Congress participation.
Third, the academic journal titled Work Journal (Revista Trabajo) is
published on a semesterly basis and has served as one of the primary out-
lets of SWM. Due to financial limitations it has depended highly on sup-
port from the Metropolitan Autonomous University, Iztapalapa campus
(UAM-I). Fortunately, the journal is currently co-edited by UAM and a
commercial editorial press (Ed. Plaza y Valdez). It is now financially
supported 50% by the ILO-Mexican branch and 50% by UAM. This
2
Due to the swine flu in Mexico, the Congress was postponed until April 20-23,
2010. See http://www.izt.uam.mx/alast for more information.
journal, while it has had several directors, has been organized primarily
by Enrique de la Garza, who is the journal’s current director and is the
most prestigious labor sociologist in Mexico and one of the most out-
standing in Latin America. Since its origins, the journal developed a
unique organization, involving an editorial committee that makes deci-
sions collectively. The journal did not originally use blind review proce-
dures, but now it does. The journal is not sold commercially but is dis-
tributed free nationally and internationally through the ILO and the per-
sonal networks of its committee. The articles are currently the products
of ad hoc seminars held with ILO funding.
Fourth, the Labor Studies Program is a Master’s and Doctoral pro-
gram based at UAM-Iztapalapa in Mexico City. It was initiated in 1989
and to date had graduated 60 students. The program has 30% professors
from UAM, and the rest comes from different Mexican and foreign insti-
tutions. Eighty percent of the students that have already finished the pro-
gram have jobs as professors or researchers in other universities. It is a
solid program that is unique in terms of its specialization in Mexico. The
program is certified by the National Council on Science and Technology
(Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología, CONACYT) and is consid-
ered a program of international rank (the maximum category). The im-
portance of being certified as a program by CONACYT is that all Mexi-
can students receive grants to cover living expenses. It is important to
note that all public universities and research centers in Mexico are practi-
cally free. The student fee (for both undergraduate and graduate students)
at UNAM, for example, is less than US$100 annually. These scholar-
ships, therefore, enable all the programs to have 100% full-time students.
Research Agenda
Thematically speaking, according to De la Garza (1992), research on la-

bor in Mexico has gone through three periods: 1) Until the decade of the
1930s, research in this area was characterized by writings by politicians
and union leaders on the doctrine and practice of the student movement.
2) Between 1940 and 1968, research was carried out on labor law and
relations between the labor movement and the state. 3) From 1970 to the
present, studies have had a more academic character with more varied
themes. Four currents and research styles appear in this phase: historiog-
raphy, structuralism, labor processes, and productive models.
Regarding this third phase, the historical period corresponds to the
1970s, and the central object of study was the relation between the state
and the labor movement (union autonomy, corporativism, democracy in
the unions, and worker participation in elections), with a primarily Marx-
130 Jorge Carrillo
ist approach and led by militant researchers and students (De la Garza
1992). Priority was granted to studies on collective worker actions in the
present and some on pre- and post-revolutionary Mexico (Goldemberg
1980).
The structuralism that also emerged in the 1970s began with popula-
tion and labor force studies, from the perspective of the segmentation of
the labor market, occasionally following a Marxist economic approach.
The range of themes then expanded to migrations, labor force mobility,
socio-demographic profiles, and wages. Research on gender and infor-
mality also began. Another branch of structuralism aims to link variables
such as union affiliation, wage, collective bargaining agreements, con-
flicts, and labor strikes. The instruments of this research have been sur-
veys and governmental statistics, using the household as a unit of analysis
(De la Garza 1992).
The trend toward research on the labor process began in the late
1970s. In contrast to the historiographic current, which analyzes leaders
and the relation between labor movements and the state, it considers
workers in their working lives, labor conditions, and their transformation.
It is linked to pioneering anthropological works about the automotive in-
dustry in Ciudad Sahagún and the shoe industry in León, Guanajuato. Its
studies are based on “Italian laborism” and influenced by Touraine’s
early analysis of the centrality of labor. Its recurring themes have been:
labor processes, technologies, and organizations, under the influence of
Taylorism-Fordism and flexible production. From that perspective, new
methods such as direct observation and participant observation gain new
value. This research current declined in the second half of the 1980s as
consequence of neoliberalism, the union crisis, and beginning of the
process of restructuring production (De la Garza 1992).
Studies on the process of reorganizing production and productive
models date from the latter half of the 1980s to the present. They
emerged as part of a second phase of research on labor processes and the
make up the new labor studies in Mexico (De la Garza 1992; 2000).
They are “free of ideological and militant content and theoretically and
methodologically better endowed.” Their themes are: the labor process,
the labor market, the spatial reproduction of labor, and industrial relations.
Labor studies about increasing competitiveness also begin to emerge, in-
cluding research on the diffusion of just-in-time and total quality control
practices in the maquiladora industry (Carrillo 1995).
Practically all the new labor studies entail extensive empirical re-
search and fieldwork. On the one hand, they focus on verifying the exis-
tence in establishments and in different industrial sectors of the phenom-
ena that occur in developed countries. But, on the other, they are about
understanding and explaining the new phenomena and the local adapta-
tion of many of the transferred processes, given that each society is
unique. At least two alternative approaches to the same process are
thereby developed: one that engages more with economic sociology and
evolutionary economics, and another that engages more with political
economy, industrial relations, and the philosophy of science, as we will
see below.
The sociology of work in Mexico and in Latin America has certain
characteristics that differentiate it from other kinds of labor studies (De la
Garza 2002):
1. It centers more on workers than on the company.
2. It is not reduced to manufacturing labor processes but rather
encompasses the service and primary materials sectors, the labor
market, the social reproduction of workers, and the industrial re-
lations system.
3. While predated by 1970s studies on labor processes, it is distinct
from these in that: a) It does not respond in the same way to
French or American sociology of labor or Italian laborism.
Rather, it is in dialogue with the new economic institutionalism
(theories of regulation, flexible specialization, and industrial gov-
ernance, including neo-Schumpeterian approaches), and new
theories of industrial relations and neo-corporativism. b) It does
not center on the labor process as part of Taylorism-Fordism,
whose main category was “control over the labor process and its
repercussions for the worker’s consciousness” (De La Garza
2001), but instead focuses on the restructuring of production and
its relation with the neoliberal model. c) It is not based on
“economistic,” “structuralist,” or ideological interpretations of
labor but rather uses a more integral approach that allows a socio-
logical reading. Today, such new labor studies dominate the so-
ciology of work in Mexico. Authors such as Aglietta, Lipietz,
Coriat, Piore, Sabel, Shaiken, and Burawoy have been very im-
portant in this phase.
4. It takes issue with the theory of dependence, which no doubt was
an important approach, for failing to explain the current restruc-
turing of production, the successful models implemented by for-
eign and domestic multinationals, or the use of best practices in
labor flexibility that tend to be precarious. Carlota Perez (2007)
clarifies this disjuncture:
The enormous difficulties experienced by the great majority of
developing countries in their efforts to industrialize have led to
132 Jorge Carrillo
pessimistic theories of dependency which hold that there is a

permanent structural gap between developing and developed
countries. On the other hand, the few recent examples of relative
success, which seem to counter that theory arouse an intense in-
terest. (2)
Overviews of the sociology of work in Mexico coincide with Oscar
Contreras’s argument that the new labor studies generated a large amount
of research that, though with varying quality, expands and accumulates
knowledge on the phenomena of the restructuring of production, labor
flexibility, and labor relations.
Nevertheless, this new direction in the sociology of work in Mexico
has not followed as comprehensive a development as the history makes it
seem. On the one hand, a) it “de-laborizes,” focusing on the industry,
emphasizing and prioritizing value chains, and centering on the firms as
its almost exclusive subject. b) In this sense it returns to structuralism as
vision of social change (Castillo 1997; De La Garza 2001). On the other
hand, the globalization of the Mexican economy and the need to increase
the productivity of companies, institutions, regions, and their human re-
sources, present an enormous challenge which has convinced labor soci-
ologists of the need for multidisciplinary approaches. Anthropology, la-
bor law, economic sociology, socio-demographics, and socio-politics in
particular have been important ways to comprehend and explain the com-
plex labor reality. In fact, Enrique de la Garza –as expressed in inter-
view- considers this interdisciplinarity to be the most important strength
of SWM. He explains it as follows: the sociology of work arrived late to
Latin America, considering that studies of factories began in this conti-
nent in the 1970s, while in Europe they started in the early 20th century.
Therefore, in Mexico and Latin America there are fewer solid structures
of disciplinary division and it is easier to make interdisciplinary combina-
tions without risking illegitimacy and without the community viewing the
work as suspect, as is the case in the United States and Europe given the
precise limits there. There is also greater theoretical and methodological
freedom for research. Furthermore, communications among Latin
American colleagues have developed in similar conditions and have been
cordial, open, and collaborative, which has fostered solid ties and multi-
ple exchanges, even though they are by hand. This is the second strength
of SWM.
THE NEW ENVIRONMENT AND PRACTICES
The sociology of work has developed in the context of the complex

Mexican situation, heterogeneous at the level of industrial sectors or even
within companies, but primarily regionally diverse. Globalization and the
demand for competitiveness of private firms and public institutions have
impacted the discourses, research practices, and ideologies of professors.
The processes of modernization, first, and then globalization, have
had important impacts in Mexico. The most evident is the growing open-
ness and integration of the Mexican economy and society and, in particu-
lar, the incorporation of best practices in companies, the government, and
academic institutions. In the social sphere, the impacts appear in the ex-
panding polarization of society and the increase in poverty and Mexican
emigration toward the United States. But, the sociology of work has also
been affected. Although relatively limited, there has been a process of
decentralization and modernization of its institutions. The number of
universities and research centers has increased, as has the number of re-
searchers and academic groups. Networks have also grown of research-
ers in alliance with research groups abroad, international agencies and
institutions, and excellent universities in developed countries. This ex-
pansion of the activities of sociologists of work in Mexico coincides not
only with the modernization of production but also with the moderniza-
tion of the government and in particular of CONACYT and the upper-
level education institutions, as we will see below.
Prior to the 1980s, research in the other sciences was concentrated in
Mexico City, in particular in its two main universities, the National
Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) and the Autonomous Uni-
versity of Mexico (UAM). These universities, together with others from
the large cities of Guadalajara and Monterrey, formed the research triad
in the country. The early 1980s witnessed the beginning of the process of
decentralization of higher education. Public research centers emerged
across the country in the social sciences and humanities, the natural sci-
ences, and the exact sciences (such as math). Meanwhile, CONACYT,
founded in the 1970s, became increasingly important in funding research
and supporting post-graduate education. By the late 1980s, CONACYT
became the body responsible for coordinating and evaluating the activi-
ties of the 32 research centers progressively installed across the country.
In turn, in the universities, research activity increased both within the in-
stitutes at the large Mexico City campuses, but also in various state uni-
versities.
It should be recalled that all public universities in Mexico are practi-
cally free (annual fees range from US$30 to 200), and in the case of
134 Jorge Carrillo
graduate programs, all students who have achieved the necessary certifi-
cation receive a grant through CONACYT that covers living expenses in
exchange for their full-time dedication to their studies.
Research Financing
Resources for science and research in Mexico come for the most part
from the government (80-85%) and to a much lesser degree from the pri-
vate sector (15-20%). More and more diverse funds exist within the gov-
ernment to support research. Not more than a decade ago, these funds
were dispersed among multiple branches of the Federal Government (in
each of the ministries, the presidency itself, and in particular in CONA-
CYT). There were also resources and programs available in each of the
State Governments. But, each entity had its own rules, resources, and
agendas, as a result of which there was a large disparity and variation in
the allocation of resources. Grant making ranged from open and closed
competitions to institutional and personal allocations of funds, forming a
broad mosaic of distribution of the resources to support research. Par-
ticular emphasis was given to allocating funds to the study of productive
modernization, technological development, and productivity, in the case
of economic activities. Funds are currently allocated for new topics such
as innovation, networks, competitiveness, and the sociology of knowl-
edge.
The most transparent and professionally-distributed resources came
from international organizations. For example, the World Bank allocated
resources as public debt through the Ministry of Labor for training pro-
grams (Probecat), modernizing production (Cimo), training and certifying
workers in labor skills (Conocer), measuring international migration, and
studying labor. Evaluations and audits assured that said programs func-
tioned efficiently. These programs, with grants distributed through
closed competition among recognized researchers, strongly advanced
quantitative and qualitative research and were carried out by scholars of
labor. It should be highlighted that these produced the face-to-face sur-
veys with statistical representation, such as the National Survey on Em-
ployment, Wages, Technology and Training (Encuesta Nacional de Em-
pleo, Salarios, Tecnología y Capacitación, ENESTYC), the Survey on
Migration to the Northern Border (Encuesta de Migración a la Frontera
Norte, EMIF) and the multiple evaluations of governmental social pro-
grams, such as Opportunities (Oportunidades).
By the beginning of the 21st century, the disperse funds were concen-
trated and coordinated, and a consistent methodology was established for
the allocation and evaluation of resources. The funds are now nationally
administered by CONACYT, and all evaluations of governmental pro-

grams take place through the National Council for the Evaluation of So-
cial Development Policy (Consejo Nacional de Evaluación de la Política
de Desarrollo Social, CONEVAL). This entity carries out enormous ef-
forts to streamline innovation and development, as well as research in
science and technology (S&T). A large percentage of its employees are
or were researchers, and more importantly, its relies exclusively on re-
searchers in the formation of councils, commissions, evaluations, etc.
Sociologists of work also participate in multiple commissions. To this
end, CONACYT has implemented programs such as: 1) Training of Sci-
entists and Technicians, which seeks to strengthen the links between
companies and universities through sabbatical and post-doctoral residen-
cies, labor linkage programs, and post-graduate fairs, 2) Scientific Re-
search, which funds basic and applied research and the development of
scientists through the National System of Researchers (Sistema Nacional
de Investigadores –SNI), and 3) Innovation and Technological Develop-
ment, which was created to advance these areas by employing scientific
and/or technological developments, for which it grants economic support,
capital input, and lines of credit.
The primary sources of governmental funds for research in Mexico
are now guided by transparency, open competitions, peer evaluations,
operating manuals, and follow-up evaluations. The Internet has been a
fundamental tool in this process, as has the participation of all of the re-
searchers who belong to the SNI. Nevertheless, like many other pro-
grams, these also have important limitations: bureaucracy, the lack of
administrative flexibility, and the variability of resources from year to
year (due to designated budget amounts and the constant devaluation of
the Mexican currency since 1976).
Despite the multiplicity of funds and programs, the accessibility of
information about them through their web pages, and the decentralization
of funding, Mexico’s investment in science, technology, and innovation
is still insufficient. In the past 35 years, investment has not surpassed
0.6% of GDP, and Mexico has been outpaced by emerging countries such
as Brazil, which has invested at 1% of its GDP, Korea at 2.91% (2003),
and Vietnam at 2% (2005). Developed countries belonging to the OECD
(other than Mexico, which is also a member) also invest very different
amounts in science, technology, and innovation; for instance, the United
States invested 2.68% of its GDP in 2004. In 2008, Mexico only invested
around US$ 4.5 billion in science and technology, despite the stipulation
in the 2002 Law on Science and Technology that investment should con-
stitute a minimum of 1% of the annual GDP.
A new method is being developed for distributing important financial
136 Jorge Carrillo
resources through thematic networks formed by research groups that link

disciplines in the social, natural, and exact sciences. There are currently
thirteen thematic networks in the country supported by CONACYT.
These networks aim to link together various university activities. For
instance, one of them, whose primary objective is to research complexity,
science, and society, is led by sociologists of work, with links to physi-
cists, ecologists, and anthropologists.
These advanced network initiatives are being developed to address
the challenges posed by globalization and the increasing complexity of
Mexican social life. For example, the country is losing competitiveness,
its industrial sectors are evolving, and poverty, migration, and insecurity
are increasing. Mexico has been losing its competitive advantage at the
international level, falling from position 32 to 60 in the period from 2000
to 2008 (Porter & Schwab 2008). The multinational firms in the country
(more than 3,000 firms with more than 32,000 sites) have been acquiring
greater economic roles, and many of them are in the process of industrial
upgrading. Industrial clusters may be found across the country. More
than 40% of the population lives in poverty. Between 10 and 20% of the
110 million Mexicans are international migrants. And, there is practi-
cally a war going on against drug trafficking in Mexico, particularly in
the states along the United States border, such as Baja California and
Chihuahua.
National System of Researchers (SNI)
The SNI was founded in 1984 with the goal of supporting scientists dedi-
cated to full-time research. Due to the relatively low wages and the con-
stant devaluation of the Mexican peso in relation to the US dollar, a
monthly economic incentive was established in accordance with individ-
ual performance, which aims to compensate researchers permanently
committed to research. Currently, and given the devaluation of the cur-
rency (now at about 14 pesos per dollar), the monthly amounts range be-
tween US$800 and 1,500. There are currently 14,000 researchers in
Mexico certified in this system in six areas of science. In the social sci-
ences (not including humanities), between 2003 and 2008, approximately
1,000 new researchers were integrated into the system, and 2,500 ad-
vanced to new levels (Figure 1). An average of 600 researchers is ac-
cepted by the system each year in the all sciences.
Figure 1. Mexico, New Entrants to the National System of Researchers (SNI).

Area 5, Social Sciences
Permanent Evaluation Based on Incentive System
Incentives for and evaluations of academic work (institutional and colle-

giate) that originates in the open economy are also part of the shift of the
sociology of work in Mexico towards rules that prioritize speed and vol-
ume of production over quality. The education and formation of research
groups is also associated with this methodological institutionalization the
sociology of work in Mexico. Globalization and the demand for competi-
tiveness in private companies and in public institutions in Mexico have
provoked changes in discourses, public support programs, research prac-
tices, and professors’ ideologies.
Each university and research center has its own system of perform-
ance incentives. While different methods and amounts of economic in-
centives exist, the systems generally combine numbers and types of pub-
lications, teaching hours, and levels of participation in seminars and con-
ferences. The amounts represent approximately 15-30% of the individ-
ual’s institutional income. In addition, many professors (more than
15,000) are in the SNI, for which they receive a monthly bonus of be-
tween US$500 and 1,500 depending on their level (four levels exist; see
Figure 1). The indirect wage of a professor-researcher in any science
throughout the country may represent up to 60% of his or her income. In
most institutions a series of diverse professional activities is permitted de
facto: consulting corporations, doing research, advising and evaluating
public sector programs, receiving funds from foundations, teaching
classes in other universities, or participating in paid professional commis-
sions, among other things. Generally, these resources are not constant
and vary widely according to the expertise of each professor-researcher
and to the social-professional networks he or she maintains.
All of this results in a wide divergence of institutional incomes
among researchers in Mexico, currently ranging between US$1,300 and
138 Jorge Carrillo
10,000 per month. Prior to the recent devaluation this range was between
US$2,000 and 15,000 per month. There is no doubt that, as in the rest of
the country, there is a polarization of wealth; while the majority of re-
searchers earns very little, a minority gets a lot. While the directors of
research centers currently earn monthly salaries approaching US$10-
12,000, a professor with a permanent university post earns US$1,000.
PROBLEMS AND LIMITATIONS
Decline in the Number of Researchers
In spite of its growth since the 1980s, the number of professors and re-
searchers in the sociology of work in Mexico continues to be small and
faces central challenges such as the crisis of sociology. The “professional
space” is controlled by a small number of people, and given the size of
the sector theoretical-analytic confrontations are more visible and even
personal. The lack of larger debate makes it hard to reach general con-
sensuses or construct broader research agendas. Strong competition and
internal inequality exist among research groups. People compete for the
same funds at the national level and for participation in groups and net-
works abroad. On the other hand, as Oscar Contreras mentioned in a re-
cent interview, while research groups have been constituted, they are few,
and their status is precarious. Outstanding among them is that of Enrique
de la Garza, which may be considered a school of thought (with a para-
digm, a journal, a postgraduate program, research projects, and signifi-
cant participation in associations and organizations), but it is the only
well-consolidated group in Mexico. There are only three or four addi-
tional groups. This implies a serious problem of reproduction for new
generations.
Competition for Scarce Funds
The funds for research programs and researchers are limited and vary
each year, but different perspectives exist on this issue. In his comments
in our interview, Enrique de la Garza (2009) considered the problem of
limited financial resources to be minor. He reflected, “Not because they
are abundant, but rather because there are not that many permanent
groups applying for resources all the time; they are divided among a few
people. If there were many groups, then yes, competitions would be
hard-fought.” In any case, the pursuit of the sociology of work in Mexico
is affected by the unequal distribution of resources inside the country,
particularly in comparison with more highly industrialized countries.

Perhaps more important is that we lack enough resources to under-
take internationally comparative studies, such as those conducted by re-
searchers in developed countries, and that funds are concentrated in the
exact and natural sciences. Another issue is that the majority of research
in social sciences in Mexico is focused within Mexican territory, while
international research, when it exists, is rarely directed and financed from
within Mexico.
Another problem associated with finances in Mexico is the lack of a
serious culture of project evaluation by academic peers. Enrique de la
Garza (2009) commented, “There is too much politics (friends, enemies,
in favor of or opposed to a theoretical perspective) … and peers are not
very objective.”
Finally, although it applies to all of Latin America, a clear example of
economic uncertainty is the ALAST journal. The itinerant character of
the journal implies a complex editorial organization; each new journal
headquarters must build a work team, assure institutional support mecha-
nisms, etc., in other words, “nationalize the publication.” All of this de-
volves into a situation in which stable structures are never created and
must be reinvented every three years (Iranzo and Lucena 2008). A simi-
lar problem occurs with several of the editorial and organizational initia-
tives of SWM.
Concentration of Skills Among a Few People
The lack of resources stimulates competition as well as concentration.

However, researchers’ necessary mingling in their competition for the
limited resources and their participation in associations, groups, networks,
congresses, etc., permanently connects members. Nevertheless, the hier-
archical relationships between evaluators and appraisers, professors and
students, administrative staff and researchers, leaders and followers are
transferred to the professional practice.
Loss of Specialization
There are ever fewer sociologists of work who exclusively focus on labor.
Researchers are increasingly obligated to diversify their knowledge, up-
date it, and address the multiple requirements of universities, research
centers, and particularly the various levels of government. Enrique de la
Garza (2009) and Oscar Contreras (2009) (another recognized sociologist
of labor at the regional level) mention the transience of the research
groups, given how members often disperse and move toward other
140 Jorge Carrillo
themes and positions (such as governmental administrative posts or posi-

tions within the universities themselves). All of this has repercussions for
the problem of how to integrate different scholars’ long-term research
agendas.
The complex Mexican social environment, with new foci more ori-
ented to innovation and competitive advantage on one hand and to press-
ing social problems such as poverty and migration on the other, has pro-
moted this thematic opening and dispersion of researchers. While the
expansion in the number of research approaches, themes, and methodolo-
gies is very positive, it no doubt affects the specialization in labor studies.
Juan José Castillo (1997) mentions that interdisciplinarity has become
trivial in current literature on the sociology of work in Latin America. In
addition, the practice of a multi-methodological perspective is not well
developed.
Oscar Contreras (2009) mentions that the political and ideological
orientation of researchers, generally leaning toward the left, in many
cases affects their research. He recognizes that while this is inevitable
and may on occasion be beneficial, it is nevertheless a primary problem
for SWM, given that it limits the possibilities for analyzing and discover-
ing different sides of the world of labor.
Dispersion, “politicization,” and declining social science interest in
labor have resulted in the diminishing importance of this field. From its
position as a central problem in the 1970s, 80s, and part of the 90s, it has
gradually evolved into a marginal theme while political sociology, elec-
toral sociology, gender, the environment, and other themes have risen in
importance.
Failure to Renew Human Resources
Practically only one teaching program exists focused on labor studies,

and despite its high ranking and recognition, it is insufficient to both sup-
port the remaining universities and research centers and continue the
work of labor sociologists who founded the field in the 1980s. Oscar
Contreras (2009) affirms this observation, while mentioning that, in addi-
tion to the noted postgraduate program, independent courses and special-
ized centers exist in some universities and colleges. In some cases these
labor centers have disappeared (such as the COLSON regional research
center). The central problem in many cases is the clash between special-
ized groups. Central themes such as gender, poverty, reproductive health,
and migration, for example, compete for institutional and human re-
sources. This has a direct impact on SWM in the form of a certain degree
of thematic dispersion, as already noted, complicating the reproduction of
research agendas in the new generation.

Furthermore, labor sociology once attracted talented and curious
young people, many of whom had great potential for research. But, new
generations have progressively lost interest, in part because of the limited
viability of the specialty in labor (Oscar Contreras 2009). For example,
there is little content in quantitative methods. All of these aspects repre-
sent a great challenge for the continuation of this field. Labor themes
must be made intellectually attractive, and professors must foment syner-
gies with students, through joint publications and increased exchanges
among institutions and research projects.
Dependency on International Organizations
The unequal relationship between sociologists of labor in Mexico and

researchers and research groups from the advanced industrialized coun-
tries also resounds in the unequal development of the science. The inter-
national research that is carried out in Mexico, when it happens, generally
depends on funding, resources, methodologies, and analytical proposals
from the industrialized countries.
Nevertheless, not only are there leading researchers in the sociology
of labor who have international presence and coordinate highly relevant
projects, although they are few, but their theoretical collaborations are
unorthodox and highly fruitful. De la Garza (2009) considers this a tradi-
tion in Latin America. Scholars mutually influence each other, and while
the majority of the ingredients come from developed countries, they are
neither linear nor mechanical. In other words, sociologists of labor in this
continent are not simple disciples of Europe or USA, but rather mix, in-
troduce local ingredients, and make their own creations.
Lack of International Experience
The central problems that affect the possibilities for international research
are the lack of resources to carry out “truly international research,” re-
searchers’ limited international experience beyond attending international
congresses, and their lack of English language facility. Contreras (2009)
mentions the need to “de-provincialize” the study of work and take it to a
more international level, in order to carry out more solid comparisons and
have an impact in other regions of the planet.
142 Jorge Carrillo
MODELS OF PRODUCTION AND THE LOCAL

DEVELOPMENT OF IDEAS
The topic of production models in Mexico, like in other developed and

underdeveloped countries, relates to a wide range of studies, given that it
is linked to the supposed “surpassing of Taylorism-Fordism” and the “in-
stallation of post-Fordism.” However, in the Mexican case, even Taylor-
ism-Fordism has not developed in many of the country’s regions, and
forms of pre-industrial production continue to be used. On the other hand,
a large percentage of such studies have centered on analyzing production,
focusing little attention on differences in country of origin and their re-
spective corporate cultures (Japanese, American, Mexican, etc). These
differences are vitally important in Mexico in terms of the adaptation of
the Japanese Production System (JPS) (Abo 1994; 2004), transferred ca-
pacities (Dutrenit et al 2006; Carrillo and Torres 2008), and which sys-
tems are truly appropriated (Pozas 2007).
In the Mexican context, studies have focused on large (usually for-
eign) companies to understand technological, organizational, and labor
change (De la Garza 2001), and to a much lesser degree on previously
forgotten sectors such as local family-run companies, with traditional
production systems based on paternalistic and informal relationships and
oriented to local markets (Carrillo and Torres 2008). These studies reveal
different modernization strategies, among which two stand out: 1) flexi-
ble modernization that involves the labor force in reducing production
costs, and 2) the development of company culture as competitive strategy.
Both illustrate the importance of the regional context that conditions and
modifies them, given that, as Carrillo and Torres (2008) put it, “The new
production systems are not developed in a vacuum but rather inserted
within specific labor, social, and cultural contexts, which give content to
numerous methods and practices.” These hybrid production systems re-
veal particularly regional realities.
In addition, recent studies consider the relationship between the mod-
ernization processes in companies located in Mexico and market trans-
formations, revealing diverse strategies. A relevant conclusion is that
there are no pure strategies in the new production systems. This finding
is consistent with the results of studies conducting by Abo (1994; 2004)
and Kawamura (2009) over the course of 25 years of research in five con-
tinents on the hybridization of industrial transplants.
The studies on models of production in Mexico question the notions
of the exact replication of models and the trend toward convergence
among them, given the regional heterogeneity and diversity within com-
panies (Carrillo 1995; 2008; De la Garza 1998; 2005). Some studies tend
to consider company subjectivities and the construction of company cul-

ture important elements in organizational changes, although they still
rank companies and systems of production based on a more structural
perspective, giving little significance to the social actors, especially
workers (De la Garza 2000; Contreras 2000).
After 2000, studies began in Mexico that extended a debate, started in
the 1990s in the USA and Europe, about whether the Japanese Production
System of export-oriented industrialization truly generates development.
This controversy is intimately linked to the current climate in Mexico of
declining competitiveness and slow industrial growth in the maquiladora
export industry in particular, as well as in other dynamic sectors (such as
automotive, electronics, and clothing). Scholars have wondered whether
these conditions are related with JPS and the development of R&D activi-
ties (Carrillo and Torres 2002).
Along with new production models, scholars have also addressed
value chains (influenced by Italian industrial districts and Porter’s clus-
ters). Production networks have acquired great importance in Mexico,
and their characteristics and impacts are very regionally diverse, particu-
larly when it comes to noncommercial, local, institutional efforts that
support company development and production. Public and private
“bridge” institutions (Cassalet 1998) between the government, the educa-
tional sector, and companies are very important in the promotion of these
industrial clusters.
A central concept that sheds light on the debate on models of produc-
tion is “glocalization.” Robertson (1995) introduced the term to make
clear that global processes are always embedded in local practices (see
also Connell 2007). The continuous process of work restructuring in or-
der to stay on track will take on different forms in different contexts.
This work restructuring is an ongoing, locally situated process in which
actors within organizations play an important role. As illustrated in em-
pirical research on Mexico, the way actors shape their everyday work
practices differs enormously in different local situations. Nevertheless,
even when taking organizational context into account, the increasing im-
portance of the global in local processes is obvious.
Another significant theme in the sociology of work in Mexico is geo-
graphic relocation, particularly the tension that exists between “clusteri-
zation” in Northern Mexico (the regional concentration of firms and jobs
and their economic, social, and cultural consequences) and the relocation
of labor toward low-wage areas inside and outside the country.
Weick (1995) helps shed light on the processes via which work re-
structuring takes place by analyzing how the concept of sense-making is
grounded in both individual and social activity. Individual and social
144 Jorge Carrillo
activities form the groundwork of each organization in which work is

structured and restructured. It is important to emphasize that this sense-
making is not taking place in a free or neutral space; on the contrary, the
ways people come to make sense of things are strongly connected to
power relations (Beukema and Carrillo 2004). Therefore, the rules and
resources to which actors can appeal are indispensable to the work re-
structuring processes and should be thoroughly taken into account when
researching work restructuring. In their actions, people constantly repro-
duce the existing situation, but they also try to modify it according to
their possibilities and interests (cf. Burawoy 1985; Delbridge 1998;
Miller & Slater 2000). Since existing structures within organizations are
rather persistent, meanings, norms, values, and power relations will only
gradually evolve and cannot simply be changed by force from “above”
(e.g., by management) or from “outside” (e.g., by state regulations).
Studies of the restructuring of production in Mexico developed in the
context of broad international debates on whether or not the world is flat
(Friedman 2005), whether or not there is a best way (Boyer and Freysse-
net 2000), whether or not it is possible to transfer JPS to contexts so
unlike those in which it emerged (Abo 1994; 2004). Two approaches
have spread furthest. The first describes polarization and limited growth,
which excludes workers as structuring actors. Rather than evolution, this
is social involution of non-winning companies and their workers. The
second claims that a process of learning and industrial upgrading is oc-
curring in which R&D processes and value-added methods are adopted,
along with a company culture of social responsibility and new internal
and external relations, particularly with local institutions. Drawing on
distinct sources of information and aiming to prove different points, these
approaches reach opposing conclusions. More importantly, however,
both have developed new interpretations along the way, generating better
understanding the evolution over generations of maquiladoras and the
adjustment of socio-technical configurations.
The Mexican situation is, apparently, more complex and heterogene-
ous at the moment than it was in the 1970s or 80s. As a result, debate,
analysis, and policy recommendations about labor are located within
broader debates. The central debate in relation to models of production
may be synthesized as follows. While some researchers presume polari-
zation and segmentation, emphasizing the limitations to endogenous
growth based on MNCs, others presume learning and co-evolution, not-
ing which capabilities are strengthened and encourage better development.
The latter point out that productivity, learning, and evolution are concen-
trated in very few foreign firms, while the majority decline, with no pos-
sibility of change. Alternatively, some companies gradually develop di-
verse capabilities that allow them to improve working conditions, and in

this process they learn and evolve. Of course, both of these approaches
offer evidence that this process is not linear and does not apply to all
companies and workers. It is therefore structurally heterogeneous. Nev-
ertheless, an overview of both reveals opposite trends. This polemic led
to the development of two separate working groups that, while comple-
mentary, have also had confrontations.
While Mexican analyses of production may be unique, they have not
emerged in isolation. Considering the recent development and the future
of the sociology of work in Latin America, the central question is: does
Latin America need its own sociology of work?3 This question invokes
the problems of universalism and contingency (Castillo 1995). Studies of
work in Latin America have two themes: a) the origin of foreign influ-
ences (mainly from France and the USA) and the way in which foreign
concepts were adapted or reformulated when applied to our context, and
b) the change in production patterns, how social actors participate in de-
velopment, and how sociology can account for it. The main argument is
that Latin American social sciences have relied on theoretical approaches
used to analyze the evolution of production in industrialized countries,
both in the import-substitution phase and in the market-globalization
phase. However, Latin American social sciences have been able to de-
velop an original path, characterized by the prominence of social change,
interest in the labor movement, and the relatively late appearance of the
workplace (Abramo and Montero 1995: 1). Carlota Perez (2007) notes
that while dependency theorists become frustrated, attempts to copy suc-
cessful strategies also prove unrealistic in totally different conditions.
She has called for understanding how technologies evolve and spread and
under what conditions “catching up” is possible.
Sociological research on production elsewhere makes it possible to
understand research groups, visions, methodologies, policy recommenda-
tions, and professional practices in Mexico. The unequal relationship
between sociologists of work within Mexico and those connected with
groups in advanced, industrial countries has been the starting point for the
constitution of diverse practices. Based on Italian “laborism,” Lipietz’s
version of French regulation, and broad knowledge of the labor move-
ment and production in Mexico, Enrique De la Garza (2005) defends an
3
Raewyn Connell (2007) analyzes this issue in a more universal manner. Her
concept of “Southern Theory” “calls attention to periphery-centre relations in the
realm of knowledge … [and] emphasizes that the majority world does produce
theory” (viii-ix).
146 Jorge Carrillo
eclectic focus on what he calls socio-technical configurations (Box 1).4

His most recent work on this topic, in which his purpose is most clear,
critiques the maquila model in Mexico.
Box 1. Socio-Technical Configurations: A Step Forward in Models of

Production?
Enrique de la Garza is unquestionably the leading scholar of both trends

in generations of maquiladoras and the viability of this model of industri-
alization. Based on the 2003 Survey on Models of Production in the Ma-
quila (Encuesta Sobre Modelos de Producción en la Maquila, EMIM
2003), coordinated by de la Garza in Central and Southeastern Mexico
and on the ENESTYC maquila modules from 1998 and 2001, de la Garza
(2005) asks whether the maquila is an acceptable way to grow the econ-
omy and provide dignified employment (15).
His work confronts what he refers to as the optimistic promotion of
upgrading by Carrillo, Lara, Hualde, and Contreras. He argues, “This
position has been losing force … and theories on the restructuring of pro-
duction have abandoned evolutionism” (36). He considers the model of
production an intersection of the level technology, the form of work or-
ganization, the type of labor relations and work conditions, and the labor
force profile (socio-demographic characteristics, skill level, and wage
levels) (18). He later adds labor and management cultures.
He statistically describes the impact of each of the dimensions that
make up this configuration (although he never incorporates the cultural
variables). The purpose is to demonstrate that the percentages and indi-
cators of the variables decrease (involution), or that their distribution fa-
vors low-technology activities and labor indicators (EMIM 2003). He
uses an interval of two years in the case of the ENESTYC, and of only
one year for the EMIM survey. His main empirical results consist of the
construction of two indices. The first is a set of indicators that reveal the
model of work organization (Taylorist-Fordist 76.9% and Toyotaist
23.1%). The second speaks to the level of flexibility: Low (38.7%), Me-
dium (46.8%), and High (14.5%) (De la Garza 2007: 421).
His interpretation suggests an extreme polarization. While the author
rejects the concept of models of production because it is about “attributes
established from theory,” he substitutes it for the concept of “socio-
technical configurations of production” (although the title of his book and
4
The concept of socio-technical configurations does not appear in the title of any
of the dozens of publications by Enrique de la Garza on production, labor, the
maquila model, etc.
publications use the term models of production). He concludes that, in

reference to the maquila, there are two dominant configurations: Taylor-
ism-Fordism, and Precarious Toyotaism (De la Garza 2005: 68). Both
are based on low wages and the intensification of labor (Ibid: 72).
Meanwhile, Jorge Carrillo and others question the level of heteroge-

neity in the maquila industrial structure. Do behavioral patterns exist?
Analysis of export maquila plants produces an affirmative answer. In
1997, Carrillo and Hualde developed the concept of three generations of
maquiladoras to classify different types of firms in terms of how labor,
technology, and industrial organization are combined and used (Box 2).
A few years later they identified a fourth generation (Carrillo and Lara
2005).
Box 2. Generations of Companies: A Step Forward in Understanding the

Maquila Model?
The term generation is understood as an ideal type of firm with a certain

socio-technical level and with a tendency to predominate among leading
firms during a specific period of time. The concept acknowledges the co-
existence of firms from different generations at the same time, and it al-
lows us to contemplate not only the evolution of firms but also the strate-
gies and policies of industrial promotion and development. In sum, the
typology enables us to understand the quality of industrial upgrading
through generations of firms (Carrillo and Hualde 1997; Carrillo and Lara
2005). The typology was analytically constructed based on different
variables and indices but relies most on trends in company activities and
strategies in relation to labor. It is presented below.
The first generation is based on the intensification of manual labor
and simple assembly (“assembled in Mexico”). The second generation is
based on the rationalization of labor (“lean production”), manufacturing,
and the adoption of new technologies (“made in Mexico”). The third
generation is based on intensification of knowledge, research, develop-
ment, and design activities (“designed in Mexico”). Finally, the fourth
generation is based on the centralized coordination of activities for the
group of plants located in the country and owned by the same company
(“coordinated in Mexico”). The evolution of different generations may
be understood using the following scheme: manual labor  rational labor
 creative labor  coordinated labor. In other words, labor-intensive 
technology-intensive  knowledge-intensive  network-intensive.
In response to criticisms of the typology of generations, scholars at-
tempted to measure them to determine how the generations were distrib-
148 Jorge Carrillo
uted in the maquila industry and how widespread their evolution was.
Two maquila surveys carried out by COLEF in 1990 and 2002 in North-
ern Mexico indicate the diffusion of industrial upgrading over time based
on the typology of generations of companies: in 1980 100% of maquila
plants were first generation (Carrillo and Hernandez 1985); in 1990 82%
were first generation and 18% second (Carrillo and Ramirez 1992); and
in 2002 18% were first, 55% second, and 27% third generation (Carrillo
and Gomis 2005).
The authors found that it as not a linear evolution, and it did not ap-
ply for all companies. The concept of socio-technical configurations is
also highlighted here, but relative to the industrial upgrading process.
Based on the 2002 survey, six types of companies were identified accord-
ing to the combination of technology, innovation, autonomy from the
parent company, and vertical integration (Carrillo and Gomis 2005). In
the electronics and auto-parts sectors in Tijuana, Mexicali, and Juarez, six
groups or conglomerates of companies were found (using a statistical
cluster analysis) with similar characteristics in terms of technological fac-
tors, vertical integration, and degree of decision-making autonomy, all
coexisting in space and time. It is important to add that this hexagonal
structure was also found in non-maquiladora manufacturing companies
in Mexico by other authors (Dominguez and Brown 2004).
The hexagonal structure in the maquiladora industry and the evolu-
tion of generations lead to the following conclusion: first of all, the re-
sults call into question typologies that suggest patterns of “dual” progres-
sion (for example, modern or traditional) or “three-way” divisions with
closed and exclusionary categories (for example, traditional, Fordist, and
Toyotaist). The differences among maquiladora plants do not present
themselves in pure or delimited categories, but rather in hybrid configura-
tions. Secondly, the idea that each plant is unique and therefore hybrid
also comes into question, given that groups of establishments exist with
similar arrangements (Carrillo and Gomis 2005).
The analysis of the restructuring of production, its relationship to in-

dustrial models, and its implications for labor in Mexico serves as an ex-
ample of the main challenges faced by research groups and individual
researchers. The analysis and debate are depend strongly on the unit and
source of analysis used: national surveys (De la Garza 2005) or regional
surveys and case studies (Carrillo and Barajas 2007). This may produce
not only opposite results (Precarious Toyotaist versus Industrial Upgrad-
ing) but may also contribute to the formation of professional identity and
the understanding of the primary task of sociology vis-à-vis society.
Which of the two approaches is superior or better in analytical, explana-
tory, and public-usefulness terms? Are there complementarities or strict

polarity? Some authors have framed their positions in response to these
questions (Box 3).
Box 3. The Critique (based on Contreras 2008)
For some time, the dominant approach in academic studies was “neo-
Taylorist,” a particularly critical perspective in relation to the economic
and social impacts of maquiladoras in Mexico. Among the most valu-
able contributions of this current is having shown some of the negative
aspects of the maquiladoras: low wages as the primary competitive ad-
vantage; almost nonexistent production chains in the national economy;
labor intensification as strategy to raise productivity; environmental dete-
rioration resulting from indiscriminate and unregulated development;
and, finally, multiple labor force control and subordination mechanisms
inside the companies.
However, this perspective also had important limitations, such as as-
similating the diverse and complex social processes of companies to mere
management strategies to reinforce control over the workforce. This type
of reductionism impeded adequate analysis of the intense transformations
that the maquiladora companies began to experience in the late 1980s
and throughout the 1990s. The introduction of new technologies and new
administrative methods were interpreted as company strategies to inten-
sify labor burdens, reinforce controls over the labor process, and increase
the fragmentation and manipulation of the workers. In an expression that
aptly summarized the neo-Taylorist vision regarding the changes in the
maquiladoras, in the late 1980s, Alain Lipietz (1995) called it a “shoddy
Japanization.” In a more analytical formulation of this characterization,
Enrique de la Garza (2005) referred to “Precarious Toyotaism.”
Perhaps more pernicious than this conceptual ambiguity is the as-
sumption, widespread among academics who ascribed to this perspective,
that the task of academic analysis consists of combating this industrializa-
tion model, rather than explaining the trajectory of the industrial model,
the social processes of companies, and their relations with their surround-
ings.
For its part, toward the late 1990s, the COLEF group converged with
another academic network that might be referred to in generic terms as
the UAM-X group (in reality, another node that included researchers
from various institutions in Central Mexico). The first had considerable
experience in empirical research, and the second offered a more sophisti-
cated theoretical and methodological platform, connected to the tradition
of Latin American critiques of economic development but in particular
150 Jorge Carrillo
with recent theories of institutional and evolutionist economics. They

addressed themes such as technological learning; problems of adaptation,
cooperation, and network formation; and company relations with the in-
stitutional context (Villavicencio 2007). This new group carried out stud-
ies on the evolution of the technological and organizational capacities of
maquiladora companies and their links with supplier industries and sup-
port institutions (Dutrenit 2007), which generated knowledge-intensive
industrial clusters and resulted in a process of co-evolution, albeit dis-
persed, considering that various types of companies were identified (Lara
2007).
Rather than a theoretical or methodological confrontation, the group
confronted heterogeneous sets of concepts and variables; rather than a
debate that would enable it to assess the explanatory capacity of the theo-
ries, the comparison of strategies focused on their political implications.
As the extreme, this kind of interpretation more or less mechanically
linked the organization of production with forms of domination and ma-
nipulation of workers, instead of critically associating new technologies
and new administrative methods with development and modernization
(Contreras 2008).
CONCLUSION
The sociology of work in Mexico is relatively new. Given its approxi-

mately thirty-year trajectory, it has been very productive and has been
able to institutionalize, earn recognition, and forge its own identity in the
Mexican and Latin American contexts, as well as at a more international
level.
Regarding the origins of SWM, in this new stage it is important to
recognize endogenous and exogenous aspects. We may situate the do-
mestic factors at the beginning of the 1980s in the international seminars
organized by UNAM on industrial reorganization and the emergence of
new technologies, on one hand, and in the professor training courses or-
ganized by UAM, on the other. Professors such as Francisco Zapata and
Orlandina de Oliveira of El Colegio de México and Enrique de la Garza
of UAM-I were central in this “incubator stage.” In reference to the ex-
ternal origins, the interaction with other sociologists of work from Latin
America and other countries was a clear catalyst of the construction of
the profession. Workshops and meetings with the Latin American Social
Sciences Council (Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales -
CLACSO) in Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Puerto Rico, and Argentina were key
in the formation of this network and identity. The list is long, and at the
risk of unintentionally omitting key colleagues, for which I beg forgive-

ness, I would like to name a few professors who fulfilled very important
roles in the first stage of construction of the sociology of work in Latin
America, in collaboration with Mexican sociologists of work: Martha
Novick and Maria Antonia Gallart from Argentina; Nadya Castro, Marcia
Leite, Alice Abreu, and Roque Aparecido da Silva from Brazil; Lais
Abramo, Cecilia Montero, and Alvaro Díaz from Chile; María Eugenia
Trejos and Juan Pablo Perez Sainz from Costa Rica; Carlos Alá Santiago
from Puerto Rico; Luis Stolovich and Marcos Superville from Uruguay;
Consuelo Iranzo and Hector Lucena from Venezuela; Rainer Dombois
and Ludger Pries from Germany; Juan José Castillo from Spain; Pierre
Tripie and Elena Hirata from France; and John Humphrey from the UK.
The central themes which have been addressed by SWM include:
technological change, work organization, flexibility in the labor markets,
the way the labor force is used, union changes, worker culture and sub-
jectivity, chains of production, and company strategies. In general, these
topics are related to industrial reorganization, industrial restructuring, the
labor market, and labor relations. Particular attention has been paid to the
theme of models of production, as a concept that organizes and guides
multiple changes.
Among the strengths of SWM are the networks that have been
formed linking the diverse disciplines in projects, associations, and work-
ing groups, enriching the knowledge and capacities of labor sociologists.
The dialogue with and influence from economic-sociology, socio-
demographics, socio-politics, and socio-anthropology have been particu-
larly relevant. To summarize the benefits of these networks, we could
highlight: a) multidisciplinarity; b) greater academic rigor; c) participa-
tion in teaching courses, and d) our necessary coexistence due to the mul-
tiplicity of activities where we coincide (networks, congresses, forums,
workshops, book presentations, and the dissemination of studies). The
empirical character of the majority of the studies and the collective work
on the most important projects speak to the strategic values of SWM.
On the contrary, the factors that limit the sociology of work as pro-
fession are also numerous. They include: a) the preference for descrip-
tive, empirical studies with little theoretical innovation; b) the small
number of researchers and students; c) the lack of financial resources for
research and their instability; d) the lack of financing to carry out com-
parative international studies and Mexico’s disadvantaged financial situa-
tion in comparison with the developed countries; e) the predominance of
hierarchical relations in researcher training, professional relations, and
administrative and research teams; f) the lack of specialization due to the
diversity of converging approaches, methodologies, and disciplines; g)
152 Jorge Carrillo
the absence of sufficient internationalization of scholars, including facil-

ity with the English language; and h) the lack of debate and consensus on
how to broaden our research agenda.
Finally, the challenges for SWM are vast. Needs include: a) greater
internationalization of researchers and students; b) theoretical innovation;
c) greater depth and expertise in several labor-related topics; and d) in-
crease in the number of researchers and students. Of particular impor-
tance is the need to carry out comparative international studies. In this
respect, Enrique de la Garza highlights the need to take advantage of new
international funds, such as those from the European Union, that have an
interest in Latin America, to put together international projects that are
truly comparative between countries in the region, but also with other
regions of the world. This latter activity could help overcome a very
common practice (not only in Mexico): the vast production of books and
organization of conferences carried out year after year with the purpose
of publishing collections of thematic or regional papers on Mexico or that
relate to other countries, but that generally are not comparative. While
there are financial resources in Mexico and Brazil, they are very limited
in other Latin American countries. It is therefore crucial to diversify the
search for funds. It is not only a matter of internationalizing Mexican
sociologists of work but also of being able to increasingly attract notable
visiting professors from diverse regions of the planet.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abo, T., ed. Hybrid Factory. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.
-----. Japanese Hybrid Factories. A Comparison of Global Production
Strategies. London: Palgrave, 2004.
Abramo, L. J., et al. “The Institutionalization of the Sociology of Work
in Latin America.” Work and Occupations 24, no. 3 (1997): 348-
363.
Abramo, L. J. and C. Montero. “La Sociología del Trabajo en América
Latina: Paradigmas Teóricos y Paradigmas Productivos.” Revista
Latinoamericana de Estudios del Trabajo 1, no. 1 (1995): 73-96.
Boyer, R. and M. Freyssenet. Productive Models: The Condition of Prof-
itability. New York: Palgrave, Macmillan, and Gerpisa, 2000.
Berger, S. How We Compete: What Companies around the World are
Doing to Make It in Today’s Global Economy. New York: Double-
day, 2006.
Beukema, L. and J. Carrillo. “Globalism/Localism at Work.” Research
in the Sociology of Work 13 (2004): 99-124.
Burawoy, M. The Politics of Production. London: Verso, 1985.

Carrillo, J. “La Experiencia Latinoamericana del Justo a Tiempo y el
Control Total de la Calidad.” Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios
del Trabajo 1, no. 1 (1995): 193-217.
-----. “Flexible Production in the Auto Sector: Industrial Reorganization
at Ford - Mexico.” World Development 23 no. 1 (1995): 87-102.
----- and R. Barajas, eds.. Maquiladoras Fronterizas: Evolución y
Heterogeneidad en los Sectores Electrónico y Automotriz. Tijuana:
COLEF, 2007.
----- and A. Hernández. Mujeres Fronterizas en la Industria
Maquiladora. Tijuana: COLEF, 1985.
----- and A. Hualde. “Maquiladoras de Tercera Generación. El Caso de
Delphi-General Motors.” Comercio Exterior 47, no. 9 (1997): 747-
758.
----- and A. Lara. “Mexican Maquiladoras: New Capabilities, Coordina-
tion, and the Emergence of New Generation of Companies.” Innova-
tion: Managment, Policy and Practice 7, no. 2 (April-August 2005):
256-273.
Carrillo, M., J. Martínez and J. Lara. “El Comportamiento de la Maquila
en Querétaro.” In Modelos de Exportación en la Maquila de
Exportación en México. Mexico City: Plaza y Valdez/UAM, 2007,
pp. 139-168.
Carrillo, M. and J.L. Torres. “El Debate Sobre las Maquiladoras en
México.” Internal Document, Universidad Autónomade Querétaro,
Querétaro, 2002.
Casalet, M. “The Institutional Matrix and Its Main Funtional Activities
Supporting Memoration.” In The Mexican Innovation System, edited
by M. Cimoli. México City: OCDE/CONACYT, 1998.
----- and L. González. “El Entorno Institucional y la Formalizaron de las
Redes en el Sector Electrónico de Chihuahua.” In La Emergencia de
Dinámicas Institucionales de Apoyo a la Industria Maquiladora de
Mexico, edited by D. Villavicencio. Mexico City: Ed. Miguel Angel
Porrua/UAM, 2006, pp. 49-88.
Castillo, J. J. “¿A Dónde Va la Sociología del Trabajo?” Revista
Latinoamericana de Estudios del Trabajo 1, no. 1 (1995).
-----. “El Paradigma Perdido de la Interdisciplinaridad: Volver a los
Clásicos.” Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios del Trabajo 5
(1997).
COLEF. “Encuesta de Aprendizaje Tecnológico y Escalamiento
Industrial en Plantas Maquiladoras.” Proyecto Conacyt no. 36947-s
Aprendizaje Tecnológico y Escalamiento Industrial: Perspectivas
para la Formación de Capacidades de Innovación en las
154 Jorge Carrillo
Maquiladoras en México. Tijuana: COLEF/FLACSO/UAM, 2002.

Social Science. London: Allen & Unwin, 2007.
Contreras, O. “Los Estudios Acerca de la Flexibilidad Laboral en México:
Algunas Observaciones Críticas.” Estudios Sociológicos 18, no. 54
(2000): 727-735.
-----. “Reflexiones sobre la Sociología del Trabajo.” Paper presented at
the 6th Congress of the Asociación Mexicana de Estudios del Trabajo,
Queretaro, 2008.
-----. Interview by J. Carrillo, Tijuana, February 2009.
Delbridge, R. Life on the Line of Contemporary Manufacturing. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1998.
De La Garza, E. La Sociología del Trabajo en México: Balances y
Desafíos. Mexico City: Plaza y Valdez/UAM, 1993.
-----. “La Situación del Trabajo en México.” In Economia y Sociología
del Trabajo. Madrid: Ministerio del Trabajo, 1994.
-----. “La Flexibilidad del Trabajo en América Latina.” Revista
Latinoamericana de Estudios del Trabajo 5 (1997).
-----, ed. Tratado Latinoamericano de Sociología. Mexico City: Fondo
de Cultura Económica, 2001.
-----, ed. Modelos de Exportación en la Maquila de Exportación en
México. Mexico City: Plaza y Valdez/UAM, 2005.
-----. “The Crisis of the Maquiladora Model in Mexico.” Work and
Occupations 34, no. 4 (2007): 399-429.
-----. Interview by J. Carrillo, Tijuana, February 2009.
-----. and J. Carrillo. “Los Fundamentos Teóricos de la Sociología del
Trabajo en México.” Iztapalapa 42 (1997): 15-48.
-----., J. Carrillo and F. Zapata. “Los Estudios Sobre el Trabajo en
México.” Revista de Trabajo 2, no. 8 (July 1995): 165-183.
-----. and C. Salas, eds. La Situación del Trabajo en México. Mexico
City: Plaza y Valdéz, 2003.
Domínguez, L. and F. Brown. “Medición de las Capacidades
Tecnológicas en la Industria Mexicana.” Revista de la CEPAL 83
(August 2004): 135-151.
Dombois, R. and L. Pries. “¿Necesita América Latina su Propia
Sociología del Trabajo?” Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios del
Trabajo 5 (1995).
Dutrenit, G. et al. Acumulacion de Capacidades Tecnologicas en
Subsidiarias de Empresas Globales en Mexico: El Caso de la
Industria Maquiladora de Exportación.” Mexico City: Miguel Angel
Porrua/UAM, 2006.
Friedman, T. The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Cen-
tury. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Gioux, 2005.

Giuliani, E., C. Pietrobelli and R. Rabellotti. “Upgrading In Global
Value Chains: Lessons From Latin American Clusters.” World
Development 33, no. 4 (April 2005): 549-573.
Goldemberg, J. El Movimiento Obrero en el México Post-Revolucionario.
Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, 1980.
Hualde, A. Aprendizaje Industrial en la Frontera Norte de México: La
Articulación entre el Sistema Educativo y el Sistema Productivo
Maquilador. 2nd ed. Mexico City: Plaza y Valdes, 2001.
Humphrey, J. “Nuevas Fuentes de Competitividad Manufacturera:
Organización de la Producción y Relaciones Interempresariales.”
Revista Mexicana de Sociología LVII, no. 4 (1995).
----- and H. Schmitz. “Governance and Upgrading: Linking Industrial
Clusters and Global Value Chain Research.” IDS Working Paper No.
120. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sus-
sex, 2000.
----- and H. Schmitz. “How Does Insertion in Global Value Chains
Affect Upgrading Industrial Clusters?” Regional Studies 36, no. 9
(2002).
Iranzo, H. and C. Lucena, “Presentación.” Revista Latinoamericana de
Estudios del Trabajo 20 (2008): 4.
Katz, J. Reformas Estructurales, Productividad y Conducta Tecnológica
en América Latina. Santiago: Fondo de Cultura Económica y
CEPAL, 2000.
Kawamura, T., ed. Hybrid Factories in the United States under the
Global Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Lara Rivero, A. Aprendizaje Tecnológico y Mercado de Trabajo en las
Maquiladoras Japonesas. México: Miguel Ángel Porrúa/UAM,
1998.
-----. “Packard Electric/Delphi and the Birth of the Autopart Cluster: the
Case of Chihuahua, México.” International Journal of Urban and
Regional Research 26, no. 4 (2003).
-----. Co-Evolución de Empresas, Maquiladoras, Instituciones y
Regiones: Una Nueva Interpretación. Mexico City: Miguel Ángel
Porrúa/UAM, 2007.
-----, J. Arellano, and A. García. “Co-Evolución Tecnológica entre
Maquiladoras de Autopartes y Talleres de Maquinado.” Comercio
Exterior 55, no. 6 (2005): 586-599.
Lipietz, Alain. “De Toyota-City a la Ford-Hermosillo: La Japonización
de Pacotilla.” El Cotidiano 67 (January-February 1995): 39-47.
Miller, D. and D. Slater. The Internet. Oxford: Berg, 2000.
Montero, Cecilia. “Trabajo y Desarrolló Endógeno: Notas para una Ética
156 Jorge Carrillo
del Trabajo en América Latina.” Revista Latinoamericana de

Estudios del Trabajo 5, no. 5 (1997).
Muro, Gabriel. “Notas sobre la Metodología Cualitativa en la Sociología
del Trabajo.” Consejo de Ciencia y Tecnología de Guanajuato 2, no.
26 (October 2007): 540-551.
Perez, C. “New Technologies and Development.” In The International
Library of Critical Writings in Economics 213: Innovation and Eco-
nomic Development. Amsterdam: Mytelka, 2007.
Porter, M. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: Basic
Books, 1990.
----- and K. Schwab. Global Competitiveness Report 2008-2009. Ge-
neva: World Economic Forum, 2008.
Pozas, M. “Entre la Generación y la Apropiación del Valor Agregado.”
Paper presented at Seminario Fimas Multinacionales en Mexico: de
la Innovación a la Responsabilidad Social, Mexico City, November
2007.
Robertson, D. “Glocalization: Time-Space and Homogeneity-
Heterogeneity.” In Global Modernities, edited by M. Featherstone, S.
Lash and R; Robertson. London: Sage, 1995, pp. 25-44.
Stallings, B. and W. Péres. Growth, Employment, and Equity: The Im-
pact of Economic Reforms in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Santiago: CEPAL-United Nations, 2000.
Toyota Company. The Toyota Production System, Tokyo: Toyota Motor
Company, 1996.
Villavicencio, D, ed. La Emergencia de Dinámicas Institucionales de
Apoyo a la Industria Maquiladora de Mexico. Mexico City: Miguel
Ángel Porrúa/UAM, 2006.
Weick, K. Sensemaking in Organization. London: Sage, 1995.
Publishing Sociological Journals in Argentina 157
Publishing Sociological Journals in

Argentina: Problems and Challenges
Alicia Itatí Palermo, Council of Professional Sociologists (CPS),
Argentina 1
The topic I will discuss is the problems and challenges faced by scientific
journals of sociology in Argentina.
First, I will talk about the importance of scientific journals. Second, I
will present a brief history of scientific journals of sociology in Argentina.
Third, I will characterize their current situation and analyze their prob-
lems, many of which are shared with other Latin American journals.
Fourth, I will review the challenges they face ahead.Scientific journals
are the main means that the scientific community has to communicate
their research.
As regards the importance of scientific journals, some authors (Cole
2000; Martin Sempere 2001) claim that scientific journals are not only a
means of communicating scientific knowledge but also that, from the so-
ciological point of view, they constitute part of the system of evaluating
research activity.
Martin Sempere (2001) notes, "The concept of journal embodies all
the main functions to be fulfilled in scientific communication, and it has
as its principal component quality certification." She also mentions the
protection of copyright, the dissemination of research results, and the
function of storage and accessibility, which ensures the stability of the
information. From this perspective, scientific journals are the result of
efforts by publishers and other agents in the system of research and de-
velopment that, together with researchers, makes their existence possible.
The quality of these publications, their dissemination, and their impact in
the scientific community reflect the maturity of this research and devel-
opment system.
Therefore, editing a journal is a key element not only in the institu-
tionalization of any discipline but also for the structure of scientific
evaluation. Professional fields are areas with different levels of structur-
ing. These fields have limits and rules that establish who is in or has the
1
Alicia Itatí Palermo is the editor of the Revista Argentina de Sociología.
158 Alicia Itatí Palermo
skills necessary to enter the field, exercise those skills, and be able to ad-
vance in the profession.
There are more structured areas and less structured areas that have
more permeable boundaries or are in the process of construction. For
many authors, this is the case in sociology, especially in our country,
where the discipline has existed for around fifty years.
BRIEF HISTORY OF SOCIOLOGY JOURNALS

IN ARGENTINA
The history of scientific journals of sociology in Argentina 2 shows the

absence, for several decades, of a journal that defines the scientific field
of sociology, despite several abortive attempts.
Pereyra (2005) argues, "The history of sociology in Argentina has
been characterized by an unusual circumstance: the absence of a journal
that defines the scientific field of sociology, establishes disciplinary
boundaries, and channels discussions about its issues, problems, and chal-
lenges, as other countries have carried out in some publications.” He
concluded that the founding of the Revista Argentina de Sociología (Ar-
gentine Review of Sociology, RAS) 3 is an opportunity to establish a new
communication channel for Argentinean sociologists and promote greater
communication within the field of sociology, a dialogue always necessary
for the development of sociological knowledge.
The University of Buenos Aires (UBA), and more specifically the
Faculty of Philosophy and Arts, had an important role in the history of
sociology in Argentina. Even though the major in sociology was estab-
lished at the university in 1957, 4 the first courses in sociology had existed
since 1898, and an Institute of Sociology was founded in 1941 which
published the Boletín del Instituto de Sociología 5 and later the Cuader-
nos del Instituto de Sociología. Until then, papers in this field were pub-
lished in literary journals and in university annals. Pereyra (2005) goes
on, "The 50s witnessed another experiment that also failed: the unfin-
ished plan to found the Revista Argentina de Sociología. This scientific
2
This historical review builds on Pereyra (2005).
3
The RAS is a sociology journal, published by the Council of Professional S oci-
ologist, which began in 2003.
4
Currently, there are sociology majors at the following national universities:
Buenos Aires, Comahue, Cuyo, La Plata, Litoral, Mar del Plata, San Juan, San
Martín, Santiago del Estero, and Villa María.
5
In 1952 and 1953 this bulletin published papers and proceedings of the First
Latin American Congress of Sociology, held in Buenos Aires in 1951.
journal was going to be edited by the Institute of Sociographic Planning

at National University of Tucumán ... However, after editing the first is-
sue, the journal did not go on sale for reasons as yet unknown.”
At the end of the decade of the 1950s, the journal Desarrollo
Económico was founded, a publication which is currently published by
the Economic Development Institute, still exists, and has achieved high
standards of quality, so one can highlight its role in science social, even
when it is not a sociology-specific journal (between 1958 and 1991, only
12% of articles published by this journal were sociological, according to
the magazine’s own classification).
In this decade, perhaps with inspiration from the newly-established
major in sociology, several national universities began to edit sociologi-
cal journals. They included: Cuadernos de Sociología of Universidad
Nacional de La Plata (1962); Boletín del Instituto de Sociología Raúl Or-
gaz, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba (between 1957 and 1973); Inves-
tigaciones en Sociología of the Institute of Sociology, Universidad Na-
cional de Cuyo (edited with breaks between 1962 and 1970); Estudios de
Sociología, published between 1961 and 1965 by Editorial Omega, under
the auspices of the Argentinean Society of Sociology and the Interna-
tional Institute of Sociology (published between 1961 and 1965), and
Latin Sociology of Instituto Di Tella (from 1965 to 1975). This last jour-
nal was published in English and included, among the members of its
honorary committee, Robert Merton and Talcott Parsons.
The military government 6 (1976-2003) complicated the lack of jour-
nals even more. The absence of a strictly sociological academic journal
deprived academics of a larger debate about the problems of sociology in
Argentina. During the 1980s, sociology took refuge in research reports
from research centers like the Center for the Study of State and Society
(CEDES) 7 and the Latin American Council on the Social Sciences
(CLACSO). 8 In the 1990s, other journals appeared, but they did not suc-
ceed.
At present, the picture in relation to academic journals of sociology is:
there are few social science journals published by universities or research
centers.
6
On March 24, 1976 the military overthrew the government of President Isabel
Martínez de Perón and started a de facto government, suspending constitutional
guarantees. This dictatorship continued until December 2003.
7
The Center for the Study of State and Society, founded in 1975, is a multidisci-
plinary center dedicated to studying social, political, and economic issues in Ar-
gentina and Latin America
8
The Latin American Council on the Social Sciences, founded in 1967, is an
international non-governmental institution, which brings together research and
graduate programs in 25 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.
However, in 2003, the catalog Latindex (Regional Information Sys-

tem for Online Scientific Latin American, Caribbean, Spain, and Portu-
gal), included in its directory (the directory is the record of scientific
journals) 190 scientific journals from Latin American social sciences,
distributed as follows: Brazil: 33%, Mexico 25%, Argentina 17%, Co-
lombia 5% and Venezuela 5%.
This shows that Argentina, despite its low number of journals, is in third
place in the region in publishing social science journals. If we take into
account the journals included on the list (journals ranked at the highest
scientific level), there are only 16 journals classified as sociology:9 Aportes
para la Integración Latinoamericana; Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad;
Educación, Lenguaje y Sociedad; Espacios Nueva Serie; Estudios del
Trabajo; Estudios Migratorios Latinoamericanos; Geodemos; La Aljaba;
Medicina y Sociedad; Mitológicas; Mora; Población y Sociedad; Razón y
Revolución; Revista Argentina de Sociología; Scripta Ethonológica y
Trabajo y Sociedad. Clearly, not all of these are specific to sociology, and
some of them refer only to a branch of sociology.
I would like to draw your attention to the Revista Argentina de Soci-
ología, published by the Council of Professional Sociologists 10 since
2003. On the one hand, this is the institution I represent, and on the other
hand, in the past few years, the Revista Argentina de Sociologìa has be-
come an academic journal of highest level, included not only in the cata-
log Latindex at level 1, but also in the Núcleo Básico de Revistas
Científicas Argentinas, which is a selection of publications in science and
technology published in this country, recognized, and classified as level 1
by the Argentinean Center for Scientific and Technical Information, in
the National Council for Scientific and Technical Research. Also, it is
included in other international indexes, such as the SCA Sociological Ab-
stracts, and Cambridge Scientifics Abstracts.
That a few years was enough for the Revista Argentina de Sociología
to establish itself as a top-level journal in the national and Latin Ameri-
can field of sociology, with a wide acceptance and recognition among
professionals in the social sciences, shows an expected rise in the profes-
9
In Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain, and Portugal Latindex categorizes a
total of 129 journals as sociology journals.
10
The CPS was created through a national law in 1988 and governs professional
practice within the area of the capital city of Argentina (Buenos Aires), the na-
tional territory of Tierra del Fuego and the South Atlantic Islands. The CPS has
846 sociologists enrolled.
sionalization of the field of sociology, which was absent until that time,
despite the existence of a significant number of social science journals.
Interestingly, the Revista Argentina de Sociología is not published by
a university. As we saw, the history of sociology in Argentina has shown
the existence of research centers and institutions in the field of sociology,
with a strong production in social science. The Consejo de Profesionales
en Sociología (Council of Sociological Professionals) has developed aca-
demic and professional activities continuously since its foundation and
has academic cooperation agreements with universities and academic in-
stitutions, including the Latin American Sociological Association
(ALAS), the Association of Sociologists of French Language (AISLF),
the Association of Sociologists of Russia, and the College of Sociologists
of Peru. The International Sociological Association (ISA) recognized
Argentina’s CPS as a regular member of the Council of National Associa-
tions of ISA, given the absence of a federation of Sociology in Argentina
and CPS’s prestige and its academic and professional quality.
The Consejo de Profesionales en Sociología organized meetings of
sociology associations from Latin America in the congresses of the Latin
American Sociological Association. In the Preparatory Meeting of the
XXVII Congress of this association, held at the National University of
Nordeste, Corrientes, Argentina, in 2008, this institution also organized
and coordinated a meeting of Argentinean colleges and professional asso-
ciations, in order to initiate efforts to create a sociological federation in
Argentina. 11 The Association of Sociologists of the Province of Buenos
Aires, the Association of Sociologists of San Juan, and the Association of
Sociologists Santiago del Estero participating in this meeting. 12 These
associations had recently restarted operations after a more or less pro-
longed period of inactivity.
The leadership role of the CPS in this field is growing and can be
viewed in light of its participation in academic and professional fields, in
the Institute of Sociological Research, and in the Revista Argentina de
Sociología, which has been positioned in Argentina as a channel of
expression for social communication and discussions about research in
Latin America.
11
In our country, a sociological federation existed, but it stopped working sev-
eral years ago.
12
In 1985, by provincial law, the College of Sociologists of the Province of Bue-
nos Aires , which now has 220 sociologists enrolled, was established, but it was
inactive in the period from 1998 - 2000. In 1986 a law was passed to estab lish
the College of the Province of San Juan, but this college remained inactive from
1989 until 1998. It now has 36 sociologist enrolled. In 2005, by provincial law,
the College of Santiago del Estero was established, which now has 131 sociolo-
gists enrolled.
PROBLEMS FOR SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS IN ARGENTINA
Editing a scientific journal of sociology in Latin America in a time of

social and economic crisis like the present is a challenge. Globalization,
social inequalities, and high levels of unemployment and social exclusion
that affect the majority of Latin American countries are facts about which
sociologists and social scientists of varied disciplines have much to con-
tribute, both to understanding them and to searching for alternatives to
improve the living conditions of the social actors involved.
In addition to this challenge, there are several difficulties that editors
have to face. The main difficulties are: this journal’s low visibility
worldwide, the low recognition by national science and technology agen-
cies and by the authors themselves, the poor preparation of the editors in
the process and rules of publishing scientific journals, the lack of funding,
the difficulties of editing volumes on time, and primarily the absence of
editorial policies that support such journals in most Latin American coun-
tries. The following are some of these difficulties.
First, in Latin American countries, when evaluating scholars’ produc-
tivity, science and technology agencies give higher scores to articles pub-
lished in journals indexed by Social Sciences Citation Index (SCI), of
Institute of Scientific Information (ISI). However, Latin American jour-
nals are rarely indexed by the Social Sciences Citation Index. There are
only five Argentinean journals evaluated by ISI and incorporated into the
SCI. Of these, only one is in the area of Social Sciences (Desarrollo
Económico, edited by IDES, Institute of Economic and Social Develop-
ment), but as we saw, this journal is not specific to the field of sociology.
Moreover, there are prejudices against index journals that are not
coming from the United States or Western Europe or are not written in
English or French. Inclusion in the indexes ensures the visibility of the
journal. Latin American journals publish articles of excellent quality, and
they are very prestigious, but they have little worldwide visibility. An-
other problem faced by Latin American journals is funding, which re-
flects the problem of financing the sector of science and technology.
In turn, there is a lack of training in editing for the editors of these
journals, who are unaware the rules or processes of editing scientific
journals and even choose not to index their journals. These problems
made it necessary to work actively to improve Latin American journals.
CHALLENGES FOR SOCIAL SCIENCE JOURNALS

IN ARGENTINA AND LATIN AMERICA
The problems faced by scientific journals should be addressed both by the

government policies and by editors. Policies are needed to improve na-
tional scientific journals and provide financial support and training for
editors.
On the editors’ side, work is needed in networking, collaborating, and
collaboratingwith other editors to create national or regional indexes and
networks. Now, I will present a brief overview of what has happened in
Argentina in these two areas.
Government Policies.
The Argentinean Center for Scientific and Technical Information is the

institution responsible for developing policies related to scientific jour-
nals. In order to support national journals, it has joined the Latindex Sys-
tem and promoted the scoring of Argentinean scientific journals. Inclu-
sion in the Latin American System Latindex marks a change in the ways
the contents of journals published in the region are scientifically assessed.
Ana Maria Flores, coordinator of the Scientific Publications Area
CAICYT / CONICET, highlights the importance of the Latindex System
for Argentinean scientific journals, explaining that LatIndex: 1) is the
first national survey of scientific publications from all disciplines, 2)
makes it possible to select, evaluate, and prioritize scientific publications
according to international standards and set editorial quality parameters
for the region, 3) advances the scoring of scientific journals in Argentina,
4) makes a new form of contact with readers, publishers, abstracting ser-
vices, and databases for international distribution. All contact informa-
tion for journal editors is updated, and the articles are open access on the
web.
The Argentinean Center for Scientific and Technical Information also
offers national science editing seminars, in order to train the editors of
national journals in scientific editing. The aim is to preserve Argentinean
publications, which are often the only source of research of local or re-
gional interest, the best vehicle to publicize the research being undertaken
in universities and research centers in the country, and an important ele-
ment of training for young researchers.
Editors of Scientific Journals
Editors also must work to improve scientific journals in the social

sciences. As Eduardo Sandoval Forero (2004), the coordinator of the
network of Latin American journal editors called Revistalas says, "The
complex situation of the journals and their future in Latin America, not
only in the national indexes but also in the international context, and the
lack of policies that support knowledge dissemination in Latin American
countries, require a collective effort that would be difficult for any single
publication to solve. Forming networks has the potential to mobilize ef-
forts, skills, and editorial policies. Surely, a network will facilitate the
creation of common understandings for publishers. A network allows us
to organize ourselves as editors, exchange information, establish partner-
ships, and, where possible and appropriate, share resources among jour-
nals from different institutions and geographic areas.”
In Argentina, the Revista Argentina de Sociología is committed to the
important task of promoting the visibility of Latin American scientific
journals. Our efforts to communicate scientific knowledge are not lim-
ited to editing but extend to the task of establishing a forum for exchange,
communication of the problems faced, and cooperative work among aca-
demic journals in social sciences in Latin America.
With the aim of working together, in the context of the XXIV Con-
gress of the Latin American Association in Arequipa, the editors of a
group of Latin American journals founded the network Revistalas, of
which I am co-coordinator along with Eduardo Sandoval Forero.
Same of the goals that Revistalas established are: 1) Develop a direc-
tory of scientific journals of Latin American social sciences and humani-
ties, 2) develop editorial strategies through cooperation, for example, by
exchanging articles and referees, and 3) organize meetings of the network
at the National and Latin American Congress of Sociology, as well as
activities that allow us to discuss the situation of Latin American journals
and to seek strategies to improve these journals.
Finally, and as a conclusion, I am convinced that by joining forces
and working cooperatively, we will take steps forward to improving Latin
American journals. For this, we need specific policies and participation
by editors in the establishment of these policies.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Cole, Stephen. “The Role of Journals in the Growth of Scientific Knowl-

edge.” In Blaise Croning and Helen Barsky Atkins, eds. The Web of
Knowledge. Medford, New Jersey: ASIS Monograph Series Informa-

tion Today, 2000.
Flores, Ana María. “Las Normas para la Edición de Revistas Científicas:
los Índices y la Evaluación de las Revistas Científicas. Aportes y
Críticas.” Paper given in the panel “Las Revistas Académicas de
Ciencias Sociales: Problemáticas y Perspectivas de la Edición
Científica en Argentina.” Presentation at I Encuentro
Latinoamericano de Metodología de las Ciencias Sociales, La Plata,
2008.
Martín Sempere, María José. “Papel de las Revistas Científicas en la
Transferencia de Conocimientos.” In Román Román, Adelaida, et. al.
La Edición de Revistas Científicas: Guía de Buenos Usos. Madrid:
Centro de Información y Documentación Científica CINDOC (CSIC),
2001.
Palermo, Alicia Itatí. “Editorial.” Revista Argentina de Sociología 4, no.
7 (2006).
Pereyra, Diego. “Las Revistas Académicas de Sociología en Argentina.
Racconto de una Historia Desventurada.” Revista Argentina de
Sociología 5, no. 3 (2005).
Sandoval Forero, Eduardo. “Ciencias Sociales y Revistas Científicas en
América Latina.” Revista Convergencia 11 (2004).
166 Napoleon Velástegui Bahamonde
Sociology, Technology Parks, Applied

Research, and International Accreditation
Napoleon Velástegui Bahamonde, University of Guayaquil,
Ecuador 1
This presentation to the Conference of National Associations of the Inter-

national Sociological Association, the Taiwanese Sociology Association,
and the Institute of Sociology of the Academia Sinica, has two central
goals, one theoretical and one practical, that, though they are opposites,
are also complementary.
First, I seek to contextualize the period that social sciences and soci-
ology are going through, an era of profound changes and new ideas and
challenges.
Second, I propose to put into use the wealth of social science and so-
ciological experience to help focus our attention on ideas coming from
the natural sciences and technology, and enhance our ability to respond to
current demands for improving the quality of social life, particularly
among the world’s most vulnerable people. I suggest we could do this by
developing applied research, highlighting the potential of technology
parks (areas dedicated to scientific research and supported by business),
and democratizing the process of international accreditation in centers of
higher education, particularly those in developing countries and espe-
cially in Latin America.
SOME THEORETICAL PREMISES: GLOBALIZATION

AND MODERNIZATION
As I noted in the paper I presented at the Sixth World Sociology Con-

gress in Durban, South Africa in July 2006, the changes I’m referring to
are varied and extensive: social, economic, cultural, ideological, techno-
logical. And, humankind has effected these changes in the course of just
one generation. However, they are of such magnitude, depth, and gradu-
ally increasing speed that the paradigms in place have not been able to
1
Napoleón Velastegui Bahamonde is President of the Federación Ecuatoriana
de Sociologos (Ecuadorian Federation of Sociologists).
Sociology, Technology Parks, Applied Research, and International Accreditation 167
interpret and explain them.

Today, we are not only witnesses but also fundamentally protagonists
of an extraordinary conceptual revitalization, of the construction of new
paradigms that aim, once again, to respond more precisely and more ac-
curately when the clock of global warming strikes, increasing peoples’
consciousness about environmental care and protection and about citi-
zens’ rights, calling not only for more strength but also importantly, for
more flexibility and tolerance.
Therefore, I pointed out at that recent congress, new efforts to exam-
ine social scientific and especially sociological problems have emerged in
the context of this broad theoretical reconstruction. Sociological thinking
is not only moving on to new issues but has also been forced to take on
new directions by the combination of these accelerated changes and
emerging social dynamics.
We can now say that the multiple themes of social sciences in general
and sociology in particular tend, directly or indirectly, to emerge from a
matrix of social relations, at once new and old. The axis of these social
relations is no longer singular but increasingly represents an “ordered
pair,” in a “binary” relationship of inseparable correlation and feedback
between two ends: 1) productivity and 2) quality of life. Class competi-
tion progressively makes these two sides inseparable, but also, and per-
haps most important, their interaction marks – more transparently – an
overall trend towards excellence in all human spheres, including eco-
nomic, social, cultural, scientific, and technical activities. Productivity is
not exclusively an economic category; it is also is becoming a sociologi-
cal category.
Now, it is unlikely that a low quality of life will generate high pro-
ductivity. We are past the time of Peter the Great, when he would an-
nounce, "I will make them progress even if I have to drag them,” or the
recent and pathetic example of Pinochet, who carried out Allende’s offer
but “kicking and screaming” and in rivers of blood, being sentenced in
life.
Instead, we are seeing the dawn of a new era characterized by greater
social participation, greater respect, and greater racial, social, and reli-
gious tolerance. The ancient contrast of wealth and poverty has dimin-
ished but not disappeared. While it remains, its presence will have an
increasingly dramatic effect, because humanity will look at it from a
greater ethical height, whose greater sensitivity implies an inherent need
to help generate answers more quickly. In this new era, we have seen the
development of a new social vision in which, in another paradox, the two
poles of business and science inform the growth of a multidisciplinary
theory where the social sciences need the natural sciences and vice versa.
As always, these extraordinary vital changes follow age old but in-
creasingly intense social and historical patterns that also manifest them-
selves in the active participation of their diverse components: ourselves.
I agree with the idea expressed in this conference regarding the "end
of determinism," or at least the beginning of the end. At the same time
we must remember that this will not be the end of determinants, because
without patterns there is no science. Entropy is not absolute. As nonlin-
ear thermodynamics tells us, in open systems, non-equilibrium states
arise. This enables humankind to explain the behavior of biological, so-
cial, and other structures and phenomena.
Today, we have conceptual systems in the social sciences that grew
up under "the golden tree of life" and were nourished by the strength of
other disciplines, particularly the natural sciences. Nevertheless, we must
never forget to repeat, with Goethe and to maintain our sanity, that like
any theory, natural science is also ambiguous.
At the Durban Congress, I organized my proposal as follows. Re-
garding the character of globalization, one of the determining factors I
mentioned, I pointed out: 1) Globalization is a historical regularity, a law
of socio-economic development, whose basic direction has been oriented
towards excellence, quality, integration, and interdependence in all
spheres of social and economic life. 2) With regard to the link between
globalization and the regional level, I suggested that globalization is go-
ing through a stage of regionalization (e.g., the European Union) and si-
multaneously, a process of strengthening "the local" is emerging that is
helping to forge the identity of nations still in the process of consolidation.
The difference is that this time, “local” identity is coalescing around the
urban perspective, whereas in the past century developing countries em-
phasized the rural. 3) Regarding the great wealth-poverty paradox, I
pointed out that globalization, like all contemporary social phenomena,
has a paradoxical character, but it is also irreversible and progressive. Its
fundamental dynamic is scientific and technological, but it responds to
the growing, current demand for productivity and competitiveness in all
areas, so it affects all aspects of social life generally, and the urban de-
mands of labor markets and culture specifically.
The Americans, with their practical sense, through the words of their
former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, define globalization as the fact
that almost all products that weigh over ten pounds and cost more than
ten dollars are global composites. Beyond theorizing, this simple, cate-
gorical definition demonstrates that this “miracle,” the phenomenon of
globalization, has already taken a seat at the concert of the real.
Finally, considering the relationship between globalization, regionali-
zation, and the processes that occur in regions and nations with low and
medium productivity, particularly in Latin America, I argued that the

modernization processes of nations are correlative and complementary to
the process of globalization. In low and medium productivity countries,
rapid changes in the economic structure make local branches no longer
primary but secondary and generally tertiary. As a result, both the state
and society as a whole have had to update their role and their structure to
deliver better services to citizens. The profound transformations occur-
ring in Latin America can only work on the condition that simultaneously
with these changes, enough resources, in both quality and quantity, are
generated to support a new brand that merges business vision with greater
social responsibility.
SOME PRACTICAL POINTS: TECHNOLOGY PARKS
The second theme of this paper concerns contemporary processes like the
"Bologna Process," the Technological "Nobel" and operational proposals
for technology parks.
As a source and as a result of the changes noted above, there has
emerged a new organizational culture around innovation, risk, entrepre-
neurship, environmental management, civil rights, the optimization of
resources, and the control of corruption, among other things. This new
outlook reflects strategies to consolidate and reinforce the changes that
have converged from various parties, approaches, and efforts, in this case
in Latin America, influenced by global, regional, national, and local fac-
tors. We will not mention any particular social strategies emerging in this
continent – since that’s not the purpose of this paper – but suffice it to say
that although none of these efforts are the same, all of them share a com-
mon factor: the desire to resolve, in the local environment and at the con-
temporary level of social development, the secular paradox of an unequal
world.
In Europe, one of the oldest continents and the cradle of important
civilizations and social science ideas, which today epitomizes the region-
alization phase of the globalization process, technology parks have
emerged as a means to stimulate the relationship between research, de-
velopment, and investment.
Technology parks are one of the most visible expressions of the many,
diverse responses demanded by this new organizational culture and the
new social relations among science, technology, society, state, and the
market. The rate of growth of these “knowledge cities” in Europe, for
instance, is different from that in Latin America. This situation itself
provokes a few questions.
In the specific case of Ecuador and its main port city, Guayaquil, one
might ask of academia and higher-level institutions for knowledge,
“What are the challenges universities, and particularly the University of
Guayaquil (UG), face for institutional development and leadership in the
next 50 years?”
An important part of the response revolves around the fact that to ad-
vance towards a knowledge-based society, in any country in Latin Amer-
ica just as in the EU, universities in general and the University of
Guayaquil in particular need to begin an accelerated modernization proc-
ess, both in their relations with the state and in their relations with busi-
nesses and society. The energy needed, including extensive financial re-
sources, cannot be wasted on the current high levels of chaos, which mis-
use resources that are essential to meeting the population’s demand for an
improved quality of life.
To orient ourselves, let’s examine a few international experiences.
First, in Europe, in the “Bologna Process,” begun in 1999 and lasting
until 2010, 40 countries are working to strengthen their academic auton-
omy and expand their roles in innovation and economic development.
On the other hand, it’s worth remembering that the four finalists for
the “Nobel Prize” in Technology in 2008 (the third edition of the Mille-
nium Technology prize being for 1,150,000 Euros), coming from 26
countries, are committed to doing research to “improve peoples’ quality
of life.” 2
Just these two cases demonstrate the wide range that extends from the
“jumping off point” of the Bologna Process to the technological inven-
tions supported by the “Nobel” in technology, imply that at the moment,
2
These finalists included: 1) Andrew Viterbi (USA, University of South Califor-
nia), whose contribution revolutionized cell phone communication technology
through the “Viterbi” algorithm, which has been crucial to improving computers
and MP3 storage capacity in wireless networks. 2) Alec Jeffreys (United King-
dom, University of Leicester), who developed DNA fingerprinting, which has
resolved thousands of paternity and immigration cases, among other uses. 3)
Emmanuel Desurvire (France, Director of Physical Research, Thales Corpora-
tion), who applied enriched Erbium to enhance fiber optic networks, transform-
ing the world of broadband and long distance communication, and 4) Robert
Langer (USA, MIT, Department of Health Sciences and Technology), who pio-
neered several fields of biotechnology, including the application of medication
without injections to combat malignant tumors. Likewise, the first edition of the
Millennium Technology Prize went to Tim Berners-Lee (USA), “father” of the
Internet, and the second went to Shuji Nakamura (Japan), inventor of the LED
(Light Emitting Diode) semiconductor, a replacement for the “traditional” elec-
tric lightbulb that gives off a pleasant white light, consumes little electricity, and
lasts for a long time.
the destiny of sociology and the social sciences should begin from its in-
tersection with the natural sciences and technology. This intersection will
allow us to generate new offers or create new universities to face the fun-
damental challenge of international accreditation and to fulfill a strategic
role.
One important mechanism for such innovation is technology parks,
which encourage broad responses, filled with the contemporary spirit of
innovation and entrepreneurial quality, such as water resource manage-
ment, environmental protection, citizen participation and rights, and the
creation of early warning systems for risks and disasters, among other
things, all based on science and technology. The research from such sites
makes it possible to produce real products, new conceptual systems, and
direct applications in production, culture, and technology transfer to ad-
dress these challenges.
Currently, it’s well known that universities no longer have exclusive
control over science. For this reason, new relations between science,
technology, society, businesses, and the market demand a rapid reorienta-
tion in order to jump start them towards the future, towards a knowledge
society. Only absolutely “stable” and “traditional” topics and institutions
are neophobes, and as a result, are generating a cycle of inevitable and
irreversible obsolescence that is driving them towards an outdated institu-
tional fundamentalism.
The University of Guayaquil, like other centers of higher education,
must act immediately to confront this challenge. If it does not, it will not
be a protagonist but a passive witness. Its international accreditation as
well as its own strategic development as an institution are in danger,
given the immanent risk of becoming seriously isolated and excluded by
an intense competition for available financial resources. Access to re-
sources depends on developing a new management approach, which will
be effective to the extent it equips itself with a holistic and interdiscipli-
nary vision, oriented towards inclusiveness, empowerment, and redirect-
ing resources.
This means reworking the university’s scientific, technological, and
cultural leadership, as well as the management of the institution, for the
next 50 years. For the University of Guayaquil (UG), the urgent needs
include the following: 1) the immediate formulation of background con-
ditions and a workplan to help us obtain membership in the International
Association of Science Parks, 2) the creation of a UG Technology Park
Foundation, 3) the formation of an interdisciplinary team of specialists to
design the UG technology park, 4) the development of a UG research
system, 5) a legal framework for the UG technology park, 6) a design for
studying the current and potential supply and demand for UG within its
realm of influence, based on planning policies that overcome traditional

divisions based exclusively on the political and administrative division of
provinces, counties, and towns and, instead, take watersheds 3 into ac-
count, 7) the redesign of the university campus and selection of the most
appropriate location for the UG technology park, 8) the selection of com-
panies to support the UG technology park, 9) a study of the most produc-
tive areas within UG’s area of influence, particularly in the Guayas River
Watershed, 10) to highlight these areas of productivity, the creation of a
new paradigm, a “wealth map,” to complement the earlier “poverty
maps,” and 11) the distribution of these results.
All this is so that a new organizational culture of entrepreneurship
and innovation emerges synergistically at the heart of the university and
contributes significantly to peoples’ struggles to improve their quality of
life through progressively increasing our productivity and competitive-
ness. We hope the technology park, whose study area will be the Guayas
River Watershed, becomes a catalyst of this process.
As the International Association of Science Parks (IASP) defines
them, technology parks are physical spaces that maintain formal and op-
erational relationships with universities, encouraging the development of
businesses by adding valuable knowledge from the third sector, to build
the university of the future. The IASP explains that a technology park
should have a stable management agency that promotes technology trans-
fer and fosters innovation among the companies and organizations that
use the park. This agency should also provide a team of specialized pro-
fessionals to meet social and business demands. The team should be ori-
ented to raising productivity and competitiveness through a culture of
business innovation and knowledge sharing among institutions within the
park or associated with it. It should also help stimulate the flow of
knowledge through cultivation, “spinoff,” or other similar things.
The nature of the UG technology park will be diverse, since the
economy of its city and the region of its area of influence is diverse.
The potential themes for the technological park’s services to the
public, private, and community sectors include mainly information and
communication technologies (ICT); communication and social networks;
nutrition and agro-industry; medicine and health; small, medium, and
large industries; renewable and environmental energy management; water
management; tourism and trade; business management; innovation and
risk; engineering; and consulting. The technology park will form net-
3
Watershed: an area defined by a natural water drainage system, delimited by
the section of a river to which it refers and the summit line, which is also called
the “water divider” of hydraulic resources. Since the 1970s, watersheds have
been used for planning the use of natural resources.
works of technology and innovation transfer; it will integrate projects

linked to local, regional, and national development efforts; and it will
address the demands of the nation and the market.
However, because the natural and social sciences have an interde-
pendent relationship, the natural sciences alone will not be able to fulfill
this mission. In order to meet the aforementioned challenges, the natural
sciences will be insufficient without active citizen participation and the
interpretation and systematization of social facts on the part of social sci-
ences and sociology.
Now, the equation is: productivity + welfare = competitiveness. This
equation could not have emerged in an earlier period. It required that
people build up more social and business maturity, as manifested in the
decline of clientelistic networks. Now, in Ecuador, increasing citizen
participation in electoral processes and in the dismissal of presidents and
governments demonstrate that we have overcome the past.
However, as we know, resistance to change is always sustained by
the most powerful of forces: the force of habit.
The present and, more importantly, the future of this equation de-
pends on the emergence of new responsibilities imposed on scientific dis-
ciplines and higher education centers. These tasks will be related, on the
one hand, to the real and potential needs in their areas of influence and,
on the other hand, to their relationships with social movements, which
should also rebuild and reconstruct an outdated social psychology, based
on dilapidated, clientilistic, and permissive customs.
In the recent past, in Ecuador, one of the factors that contributed de-
cisively to generating the biggest crisis in the history of the republic was
the role played by “swallow capital,” closely linked to huge, unparalleled
waves of corruption. Apparently, the bait was very “attractive:” some
investors were willing to pay up to 80% and more of the annual bank in-
terest rate! This phenomenon emerged in a context of inflation and de-
valuation. It pulverized the monetary reserve. More seriously, in this
nefarious period emerged not only speculative, devaluing, partisan mac-
roeconomic government policies but also a system of social concepts and
practices that were similarly distant from the fundamental objective: pro-
ductive investment.
Large social groups turned their backs on fruitful work and ended up
living a parasitic “lifestyle.” For instance, in Guayaquil, it was common
to see money changers on October 9 Street and Pichinca Street, com-
pletely occupied with responding to the enormous demand for buying and
selling dollars from residents inflamed about the immanent and daily de-
valuation of the national currency.
In due time, the swallow capital left in search of new and fresh niches,
the financial system collapsed, and the economic crisis turned into a po-
litical and social one. Any resemblance to what has happened in other
countries is not just a coincidence. Poverty passed the 80% mark, we hit
rock bottom, and now we’re trying to lift ourselves up and advance as
rapidly as possible towards increasing productivity levels. Only by in-
creasing the productivity of businesses, workers, and the nation will we
be able to confront the challenges of international markets, and this will
not be possible without simultaneously working to increase peoples’
standard of living.
It is imperative to absorb a new economic and social category that re-
flects the rapid contemporary changes: competitiveness. This basic con-
cept, which comes from managers and those who seek quality and excel-
lence, expresses the close relationship between productivity and wellbe-
ing. It speaks to the link between the degree of productivity that a com-
pany or a nation can reach while still being able to improve workers’
standards of living.
One factor that will be discussed in a new light is the relationship be-
tween the the gross operating surplus (GOS) and workers’ compensation
(WC). The crisis of 1998, 1999 and 2001, when we reached a 20% un-
employment rate, got taken out on the backs of labor. The gross operat-
ing surplus for those years was 67%, 75% and 84%, respectively, while
the proportion of workers' pay was 33%, 27% and 16%, respectively.
The GOS in this period increased by 26% while workers’ compensation
diminished 53%. A crisis administered that way turns out to be a good
deal for a few people, and this was a starting point for changing the
political actors in Ecuador.
Another issue that we should consider is training and education,
which will be pillars of these processes, but will do so, above all, within a
new image of the contemporary era that gradually assimilates the patterns
of globalization, modernization, and regionalization, and is linked to the
appearance of the era of information, knowledge, and more aware social
participation.
In the face of current social needs, people in Ecuador have become
ever more aware of their rights and duties. They recognize that the law
can be a “limit on their rights” that expands with their active participation
and mobilization. As a result, their demands can only be resolved
through real responses based on scientific research, technological innova-
tion, and entrepreneurship. There is a profound feeling in the nation that
there is emerging a new relationship between state, market, society, sci-
ence, and technology that makes it possible, at the same time, to protect
natural resources and generate the enormous financial resources to reduce
massive gaps in services and significant social inequalities.
In particular, the sphere of influence of the technology park of the

University of Guayaquil will include a watershed made up of ten of the
25 provinces of Ecuador, with 27 sub-watersheds that cover an area of
50,489 square kilometers, representing 18.7% of the total land surface of
Ecuador. This area is home to nearly 5.5 million inhabitants, amounting
to 40% of the total current population and has more than 1,200 companies
on record employing about 100,000 workers and generating more than 48
billion dollars in production, which represents about 50% of the country’s
total GDP.
One of many examples of potential of the UG technology park would
be to use technical information gathered to develop an early warning sys-
tem, which is the only way to prevent and mitigate the impacts of perma-
nent flooding. Similarly, one might make use of the technology park to
moderate the impacts of the drought seasons on the population located in
this area. Sociology, together with other scientific disciplines, can and
may seek connections with specific activities that support the develop-
ment of a proactive awareness, particularly of the rural sector, applying
and building upon community action methodologies.
At the United Nations Millennium Summit in 2000, one of the resolu-
tions was to "Increase cooperation to reduce the number and impact of
natural and man-made disasters." In Ecuador, natural disasters consis-
tently have greater impacts on the most vulnerable sectors of society, who
have an insufficient capacity to face disasters of this magnitude. The
floods caused by the El Niño phenomenon in 1982-83 (in Guayaquil, the
cumulative annual rainfall during those years exceeded 4,000 mm.) gen-
erated damage that exceeded $650 million US dollars, with important
losses in the productive sectors (63%), infrastructure (33%), and the
social sectors (4%), particularly among the most vulnerable and for those
under the poverty line. The total damage caused by the El Niño phe-
nomenon in Ecuador in 1997-1998, meanwhile, was estimated at $2.869
billion US dollars. Economic losses in the latter years were more than
four times those in 1982-1983, with reports of dozens dead, 3,700 evacu-
ated, 10,000 injured, and around 2,000 dwellings damaged. There are
some communities where a high percentage of the population disposes of
sewage into septic tanks or directly into their back yards, which makes
such areas very vulnerable to disease transmission. The paradox is that
the population of most of these communities do not even have potable
water service. Only 9 towns (17%), 3 rural and 6 urban, have piped water;
generally, water comes from wells.
CONCLUSIONS
Until just a few years ago in my country, at a meeting of the national or-
ganization for science and technology (Fundación para la Ciencia y Tec-
nología, FUNDACYT), people discussed the very existence of social sci-
ences. Today, there is not a candidate or a traditional political party that
does not use the category “social,” even if in name only, in its pursuit of
the popular vote (and the battles in this new era will be primarily elec-
toral). While this fact expresses the chameleon-like flexibility of the
forces of the past that refuse to die, it also speaks to the importance of
social issues in the contemporary environment.
Today, at the international level, the social sciences play an increas-
ingly prominent role in the prognosis of critical social phenomena, such
as in the case of the consolidation of the European Union, whose emer-
gence marked a step forward for social development. Likewise, sociol-
ogy has taken information collected automatically from Internet servers
to understand market demands, and it has contributed to the solution of
health problems (pandemics and their relationship with life overall), nu-
trition, production in general, culture, and even art.
In Ecuador, the constitution recently adopted by a vast majority vote
includes various articles that expand the guiding force of social science as
a tool for achieving social rights, equality, citizen participation, and envi-
ronmental care and protection. In general, it is almost unanimous that we
now have a more tolerant, less fundamentalist, more livable world than
even just a half century ago.
Globalization was demonized yesterday as unilateral, but today we
can look at this multidimensional phenomenon in its highs and lows as a
process that above all demonstrates progress towards a more dynamic and
informed society.
The nations of Latin America are coming together like tributary riv-
ers in a great basin of impetuous and irrepressible social, economic, cul-
tural, and ideological changes, but satisfying peoples’ just demands can
only happen if we have a sufficient quantity and quality of resources.
The concept of productivity is transforming itself and expanding to
include a sociological character. The possibility of generating high pro-
ductivity with a low quality of life is ever smaller. The new concept,
competitiveness includes both faces of the same coin. The eras of Peter
the Great or Pinochet, the latter only a few years ago, are now inconceiv-
able. Social participation reveals patterns of more respect and tolerance
in various spheres of sociological activity, which is now more prestigious
and at the same time more demanding of creative approaches and “more
achievable utopias.”
What can we say about the new science of thermodynamics - and its
increasing updates - that closely links natural and social sciences? Tech-
nology parks are part of this new type of interdisciplinary response. It is
certain that there will occur an “era of transition,” where forces that iden-
tify more with the market coexist with those that emphasize the social
sides of life.
In Ecuador and especially in Guayaquil, its main port city, the latest
elections of leaders at the national and local level, respectively, reaf-
firmed these two currents. Beyond the struggle that will emerge in the
next five years, there is a common ground: people share the idea that the
development of technology parks is a practical means to address regional
needs.
This era, full of changes and like no other before, deserves a para-
digmatic system of self-renovation, feedback, and proactiveness that
avoids, to the extent possible, or at least defers the natural expiration of
the theoretical tools that have been unable to absorb the growing accel-
eration of the course of humanity towards excellence. By the end of this
century, at a rate of growth of zero resulting from the natural decline in
the overall rate of fertility, the planet will reach approximately twice the
population we have today. Along with that, the world will reach its
“adulthood,” which will release an extraordinary flow of financial re-
sources to resolve problems and not only for growth but also for devel-
opment. This will make it possible to produce cleaner energy to address
the legacy of a more contaminated planet, which will condition the emer-
gence of new forms of social conduct and new and more diverse socio-
logical topics.
For now, the role of technology parks and their contribution to the
development of new universities, much more linked to the real task at
hand, has put in place a cornerstone for creating more achievable utopias.
Universities and organizations related to sociological work, such as
the ISA, should foresee that this implies that they need to prepare the
ground for sociologists to enter into new domains and acquire new exper-
tise. Physics and math will be ever more distant from the analyses of our
discipline. Programs that utilize hermeneutic processes, such as the At-
las.ti program for qualitative analysis, will emerge to grant us skills for
qualitative analysis and to improve the environment in which our disci-
pline develops. The “state of the art” must engage with the spirit of the
age that encourages sciences, social science, and especially sociology to
arise.
Under these conditions, institutions linked to sociological work in
high productivity countries can and must contribute to the takeoff of re-
search in lower productivity ones, through policies, programs, projects,
and special events arranged for this purpose, in order to attempt to resolve
the challenges of an increasingly unequal world. A clear example of this
is precisely this conference of the ISA, where we are gathered in the wel-
coming Taipei.
PART III:
AFRICA
Practical Responses to the Challenges for Sociology in the Face of Global Inequality 181
Practical Responses to the Challenges for

Sociology in the Face of Global Inequality
Layi Erinosho, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Nigeria1
This paper will attempt to provide (a) an overview of the historical re-
sponses of sociology to global inequality and (b) a preview of sociology
in Africa in the context of global discourse. The paper will conclude by
challenging sociologists at both the global and local (i.e., African) levels
to appreciate a return to grand theory or theorizing in order to understand
and explain social inequality and inequity as well as to reclaim their rele-
vance in world scholarship.
OVERVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY
The principal goal of Western sociology is the quest for social order in all
contexts of human existence. This overarching concern prompted the
founders of the discipline to articulate an all-inclusive theory that is an-
chored in the assumption that orderliness in modern societies depends on
the capacity of their constituents units (i.e., individuals, social groups,
social institutions) to relate to one another as well as to function opti-
mally. No society, in the opinion of the founders of Western sociology,
can sustain social order if its constituent units fail to perform their as-
signed functions optimally.
However, the inadequacy of the classical theories of Auguste Comte
(2003) and Herbert Spencer (1887) on the interplay between a sustainable
social order and social inequality in modern societies prompted the re-
joinder from Marx and Engels (1969). Sustainable social order in mod-
ern societies, according to the Marx, does not necessarily depend on the
effective performance of the customary functions by its constituents but
on a revolution that redresses perceived and/or real disparities or inequal-
ity among two major subgroups: the owners of the means of production
and workers. The determination by each of these subgroups to pursue
1
Layi Erinosho is the President of the African Sociological Association. He can be
reached at c/o Department of Sociology, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye,
Ogun State, Nigeria, or at [email protected] or [email protected].
182 Layi Erinosho
and/or protect its interests could, according to Marx, lead to a revolution

that would bring about a classless society.
One of the critical elements in the contest between the free marketers
and the Marxists is over the scope and limits of the power of the state in
social engineering. While the former were of the opinion that a free mar-
ket economic system engenders rapid economic growth and the flowering
of human spirit, the latter claimed that such sentiments are unrealizable
unless the state plays a commanding role in economic affairs.
Western social thought prior to the collapse of the former Soviet Un-
ion was crafted in the context of this debate about the most effective
strategy for tackling social inequality in modern societies. The contest on
how best to organize modern societies and also mitigate social inequality
continued until the collapse of the Soviet Union, which spearheaded the
Marxian position.
The collapse of the former Soviet Union signaled the end of the de-
bate and also vindicated the protagonists of free market. Most Marxist
scholars melted away or now grudgingly accept the free market theoreti-
cal paradigm as the key to rapid economic growth and the flowering of
human spirit. The Russians have now embraced the market while the
Chinese are gradually itching towards that paradigm.
One of the unanticipated outcomes of a unipolar world order is the
decline of interest in grand theories and the proliferation of middle-range
sociological theories which appear to dull the relevance of the contribu-
tions of sociologists to the analysis of social order and inequality. Soci-
ology has veered towards post-modernism and applied research, and the
discipline is today about everything and anything. Some sociologists
conduct small-scale studies or propound theories of limited utility, some
work as applied scientists, others cast their role more or less as social
workers, and quite a number theorize on key aspects of human behavior,
groups, and societies. This trend has led to the emergence of a more dif-
fused sociology that fails to address a key problematic in a globalizing
world: social inequality.
SOCIOLOGY IN AFRICA IN THE CONTEXT OF

GLOBAL SOCIOLOGY
Social anthropology pre-dated sociology in Africa because the latter

emanated from the colonial enterprise. However, sociology gathered
greater momentum than social anthropology due to the commitment of
African nationalists and scholars to de-colonizing curricula. Social an-
thropology fell into disrepute in the eyes of nationalists and scholars be-
cause it sought to define or perceive non-Western societies as primitive,

in contrast to sociology, which is presumably bereft of value in the study
or classification of human societies. It is therefore not surprising that
sociology departments span the institutions of higher learning in all parts
of Africa today, in contrast to social anthropology.
This notwithstanding, a few sociology departments have sought to in-
tegrate social anthropology courses into their programs or combine the
two. Even then, the emphasis has always been on sociology rather than
on social anthropology in such departments. Besides, a significant fea-
ture of sociology is the interest in social administration and social work,
resulting in the tendency to offer or integrate these disciplines (i.e., social
administration and social work) into sociology degree programs in places
like Lesotho, Swaziland, and some institutions in Nigeria.
There are a little over 350 universities and innumerable polytechnics
and colleges of education in Africa, the largest numbers in the populous
countries in the continent, namely, Nigeria, Egypt, and South Africa.
Other countries with a sizeable number of institutions that offer sociology
include Cameroon, Kenya, Ghana, and Senegal.
The deregulation of the higher education sector in Africa created a
window of opportunity for the private sector to open universities and
polytechnics (Varghese 2004). Consequently, African countries now
boast both public and private universities. The number of private univer-
sities is higher than the number of public ones in Uganda, Ghana, and
Kenya, and it is about equal in Nigeria, Tanzania, and Senegal.
The demand for degree programs in the social and management sci-
ences is great, and sociology appears to be one that enjoys high enroll-
ment by students. Thus, sociology is offered at the undergraduate and
postgraduate levels in many institutions in Africa. The most developed
programs are available in South Africa, Nigeria, Egypt, and Kenya,
where large number of bachelors and a handful of doctorate degree hold-
ers are produced annually. Sociology is also offered as an ancillary sub-
ject in polytechnics and colleges of education while the curricula of pro-
fessional disciplines like medicine, engineering, architecture, and agricul-
ture also accommodate relevant sociology courses.
Strands of Western and Arab sociologies traverse the continent.
While the institutions that are south of the Sahara embrace Western soci-
ology, those in North Africa are inclined to regard Ibn Khaldun as the
founder of the sociological enterprise (Baali 2003). Thus, there is a re-
markable difference between the curricula for sociology north and south
of the Sahara. Generally, the courses that are offered can be sub-divided
into the following core areas: history of social thought, including socio-
logical theories (both classical and contemporary, especially in the con-
184 Layi Erinosho
text of Western sociology); research methods (both qualitative and quan-

titative); and the various thematic areas in sociology. Of critical interest
among the thematic areas are those dealing with industry and develop-
ment, crime and law, race and ethnic relations, health, gender, population
studies, family, youth, ageing, etc.
The greatest challenge to African sociology is in the indigenization of
social theory or theories. Pioneer African sociologists were preoccupied
with the contest between the social system/structural functionalism on the
one hand and the Marxian and neo-Marxian theorizing on the other, prior
to the collapse of the former Soviet Union. Others sought to situate
change that has characterized the social structure and life in Africa in the
context of the impact of colonialism. However, some scholars argued for
the domestication of theories and the social sciences in International So-
ciology more than a decade ago (Akiwowo 1986; Loubster 1988; Sanda
1988; Lawuyi and Taiwo 1990). Overall, vast numbers of works by most
African sociologists seek to apply extant Western theories to understand-
ing their continent, are applied, and/or are generally descriptive.
By and large, sociology in Africa is characterized by a declining in-
terest in theories and theorizing due to the perceptible drift towards ap-
plied sociology or public sociology. This orientation has largely been
influenced by the expanding support of international foundations, bilat-
eral and multilateral, for social research on socio-medical problems like
HIV/AIDS, child abuse, gender discrimination, environmental degrada-
tion, ethnic conflict, identity and citizenship crises, etc. Consequently, a
wide range studies by African sociologists is descriptive rather than ana-
lytical. The aim is to demonstrate the relevance of sociology and how it
can be used to solve the problems of development. Therefore, the trend is
towards problem-solving studies that are bereft of theory and theorizing
but whose outcomes are, however, presented in a lucid manner (with
graphs, bar charts, etc.). The reports from such studies usually contain
ample policy recommendations that are meaningful for funders, policy
makers, and program managers. It is generally believed that this shift to-
wards applied sociology or public sociology underscores the credibility
and relevance of the discipline in the “eyes” of wary publics, policy mak-
ers, and program managers.
One could therefore surmise that there is a convergence between
what is happening at the global and local (i.e., African) levels in sociol-
ogy. Sociologists and sociologies, whether around the world or in Africa,
have drifted towards applied or public sociology in order to demonstrate
their relevance for the public, policy makers, and program managers.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
One of the principal reasons for the current worldwide economic crisis is
the pursuit of self-interest regardless of its negative impact on the public
good.2 Another worldwide problem today revolves around conflicts and
wars within and between nation-states that exacerbate social inequality.
Economic meltdown, conflicts, and wars are ostensibly motivated by
non-rational pursuit of individual, group, and/or national interests. The
world is poorer due to the economic meltdown and certainly not safer
because humankind is experiencing all sorts of conflicts and wars3 that
have resulted in carnage, physical and social dislocation of large popula-
tions, misery, poverty, etc.
These trends inevitably lead to the following questions, which
deserve serious sociological analysis:
a. What new insight, by way of theorizing, can sociologists bring to bear
on the seemingly non-rational behavior patterns of individuals, groups and
nation-states that are exacerbating social inequality in modern societies?
b. Can the current economic meltdown provide a template for understand-
ing human behaviors and societies? If yes, how, and if not, why not?
c. Is there a common trend that sociologists can pinpoint underlying these
wars?
d. Can sociology regain/reclaim its voice, force, and relevance as the me-
dium for understanding humankind and societies?
The sacred assumption that human beings are sufficiently rational
and will presumably behave in manner that will not undermine the public
good is now in doubt. Similarly, it is doubtful whether sociologists have
sufficiently interrogated the basis of social conflicts and wars. In view of
the foregoing, it is vital for sociology to reclaim its relevance in discourse
on human behavior and societies through a return to grand theory and/or
theorizing. This will, in the author’s view, be one of the practical ways
by which sociology can respond to challenges in the face of global ine-
quality. Such efforts could also provide the anchor for worthwhile ap-
plied research on poverty reduction.
2
An example is the behaviour of bankers who are inclined to extend credit to the
undeserving and/or claim generous bonuses regardless of their untoward impact
on the economy.
3
No one could have imagined the scale of human carnage in the wars in the for-
mer Yugoslavia (in Europe), Chechnya (Russia), Iraq, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka,
Rwanda, Darfur in Sudan and also Southern Sudan, Spain, Democratic Republic
of the Congo, etc. in the past 25 years.
186 Layi Erinosho
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Akiwowo, A.A. “Contributions to Sociology of Knowledge for an Afri-

can Oral Poetry.” International Sociology 1 (1986): 343-358.
Baali, F. The Science of Human Organization: Conflicting Views of Ibn
Khaldun’s 91332-1406) llm-al-umran. Lewiston, New York: Edwin
Mellen Press, 2003.
Comte, A. Positive Philosophy, Part 1. Translated by Harriet Martineau.
New York: Kessingner Publishing, 2003.
Lawuyi, O.B. and Taiwo, O. “Towards an African Sociological Tradition:
A Rejoinder to Akiwowo and Makinde.” International Sociology 5
(1990): 57-73.
Loubser, J.J. “The Need for the Indigenisation of the Social Sciences.”
International Sociology 3 (1988): 179-187.
Marx, K. and Engels, F. Manifesto of the Communist Party. Moscow,
USSR: Progress Publishers, 1969.
Sanda, A. Muyiwa. “In Defence of Indigenization of the Social Sci-
ences.” International Sociology 3 (1988): 189-199.
Varghese, N.V. Private Higher Education in Africa. International Insti-
tute for Educational Planning, 2004. (external link: http://www.
unesco.org/iiep).
Spencer, H. The Factors of Organic Evolution. London: Williams &
Norgate, 1887.
Social Sciences in Egypt 187
Social Sciences in Egypt: The Swinging

Pendulum between Commodification and
Criminalization
Mona Abaza, American University in Cairo, Egypt 1
“I am an agent of social change.” -- Saad Eddin Ibrahim
Specialists who have closely observed the evolution of the fields of soci-
ology and anthropology in Egypt seem to agree that there are insur-
mountable paradoxes that continue to loom in the professional and aca-
demic sphere due to the intricate relationship between intellectuals and
the long history of the authoritarian military state.
The retired professor at the American University in Cairo, Saad Ed-
din Ibrahim, (jailed twice between the years of 2000 and 20032 for “tar-
nishing Egypt’s reputation” along with several other charges that will be
tackled further 3 in this paper and who is currently in exile 4 ), the late
French Arabist Alain Roussillon and the contemporary “doyen” (Dean) of
“indigenous” national sociology in Egypt, Mohammed Al Gohari, 5 all
have brilliantly traced in different ways the genealogy of the birth of so-
1
I would like to thank Dina al-Khawaga for sharing her ideas and time with me.
As program officer at Ford she also facilitated the task of providing me with all
the material available. This paper would not have been written without our inten-
sive discussions. Barbara Ibrahim, has been very generous in letting me use the
extensive documentation that the Ford Foundation has compiled on the trial of
Saad Eddin Ibrahim. I warmly thank her as well as Nicholas Hopkins who com-
mented carefully on the paper.
2
Saad Eddin Ibrahim was jailed for approximately three years and put on trial
four times. Over the past two years, he was charged for multiple trials while he
continues to be in exile.
3
See Appendix I on the court ruling.
4
Yet Saad Eddin Ibrahim continues to publish in leading opposition newspapers
in Egypt such as al-Dustur and al-Masry al-Yaum. Recently, he has started to
publish his memoirs on a weekly basis in al-Dustur newspaper. His wife Bar-
bara Ibrahim is highly influential in the English-speaking world in development
research and foreign funding in Egypt. Barbara Ibrahim ran for a year the Popu-
lation Council in Cairo and today runs the expanding Philanthropy Gerhart Cen-
ter at the American University in Cairo.
5
For the three essential articles on Egyptian sociology see Ibrahim (1997),
Roussillon (1999) and al-Gohari (1990).
188 Mona Abaza
ciology in Egypt, its evolution and the external influences that have
shaped its dominant discourses. Interestingly, all these scholars agree that
although sociology in Egypt emerged at about the same time as other de-
partments of sociology in several European universities, Egyptian sociol-
ogy’s development and evolution seems to have been stifled by the fact
that it was largely saturated with the discourse of reform, often tainted by
conservative overtones. Al Gohari insists that the field of sociology
mostly was confined to offering its services to the then emerging post-
colonial state for the purposes of “social engineering” (interview with Al-
Gohari, May 24, 2008). In his analysis of the post-colonial generation of
Egyptian sociologists of the 1950s and 60s, such as ‘Abdel ‘Aziz ‘Ezzat,
Ibrahim found that ‘Ezzat mostly praised the then young military regime,
and even dedicated his book to Gamal Abdel Nasser; this illustrates the
extent to which ‘Ezzat’s central mission was to offer his knowledge for
the service of the prince, i.e. the military (Ibrahim 1997: 550). An offer
which ironically, was repeatedly made by Ibrahim himself and in doing
so, Ibrahim managed to remain close to the regime for many years until
the establishment turned against him. It seems that for both Ibrahim as
well as for the fifties/sixties generation of sociologists, advising the
“princes” turned into a bad experience. Time and again it seems that so-
ciology failed to emancipate itself from the discourse of “state building
and “scientism”. Overall, it failed to create a critical independent school
of sociological investigation.
Other observers have pointed to the fact that sociology in the Arab
world has been recurrently referred to as being in state of perpetual “cri-
sis”—a crisis stemming from a serious absence of theorizing (Ghazalla
and Sabbagh 1986: 373). Furthermore, it was understood as lacking any
reflection about the applicability of Western methods in a different local
context. Several authors pointed to the fact that Arab sociology has
turned into an insipid mimicry of Western sociology. Arab sociology has
basically been restricted to translating and copying without much original
analysis.6 Sociology was “disfigured by the political institution… it was
an impossible practice.” 7 Up until the mid-eighties, some even argued
that sociology had yet to emerge (Ghazalla and Sabbagh 1986).This also
explains why, at the time, in the mood of decolonizing sociology, the
claims of “indigenizing” the field as a counter-project to Western hegem-
ony extended first to “Arabizing” sociology during the phase of Arab na-
tionalism and later on to “Islamizing” sociology with the rise of Islam-
6
This critical stance is clearly expressed in the writings of Mohammed al-Gohari,
Saad Eddin Ibrahim and Iman Ghazalla and Georges Sabbagh.
7
Al-Kanz cited by Iman Ghazalla and Georges Sabbagh, p. 379.
ism.8 But the discourse of “crisis” has been in fashion for a while. For
many intellectuals, the state of “crisis” refers to their struggle to articulate
a shifting and blurred identity with the advent of modernity, reform and
with the constant and painful encounter with the “Other” colonial and
post-colonial West. The Moroccan historian Abdallah Laroui has bril-
liantly theorized on this very struggle.9 The discourse of “crisis” has also
refered to the attempt to decipher the ambiguous relationship of the intel-
lectuals and the literati to the state. This relationship has oscillated be-
tween two different extremes: either the intellectual’s oppression by the
state and extreme violence against this oppression or his/her cooption and
submission to the state whereby the intellectual is transformed into the
producer of culture as an “enlightened”, official government intellectual.
In the latter situation, the intellectual also seems to have adopted a sim-
plistic technophile perspective entailing a blind adoration of science.10
This paper explains the culmination of “criminalizing sociology” 11
through the cause célèbre of the trial of the sociologist Saad Eddin Ibra-
him, who was charged with allegedly spying, spreading false information
and tarnishing the country’s reputation. The gathering of empirical data
and the practice of sociology as a profession have a long history of elicit-
ing distrust from the regime. Ibrahim’s case can be read as a logical con-
tinuation of a “public culture” produced by a long history of clashes with
an authoritarian state that neither needed nor understood why sociological
investigation should exist.
With Egypt’s entrance into the global market, the pervasiveness of
corporatist culture was strongly felt in many spheres including the aca-
demic one. However, it is necessary to be mindful of Egypt’s specificity
as a Third World country that receives massive development aid from the
North. For example, Egypt has never before witnessed a flowering of pri-
vate research centers as what has occurred today, a flourishing that coin-
cided with the privatization of research and academia with a strong reli-
ance on foreign funds. Paradoxically, in interviews conducted by al-
Ahram Weekly with university professors, most interviewees stated that
these research centers play a insignificant role as think-tanks influencing
politicians (el-Ghitany 2005).12 And yet one wonders about the extremely
8
On this point, see Morsy, Nelson, Saad, and Sholkamy (1991)
9
See Laroui (1977).
10
See Salvatore (1991) for one of the most interesting works on the discourse of
“crisis” and Arab intellectuals. I borrow the idea of the “technophile intellectual”
from Laroui (1977).
11
The term has been used by several sociologists such as Mohammed al-Gohari
and Hania Sholkamy.
12
According to the Cairo University professor of political science Mustafa
190 Mona Abaza
poor academic sociological production that has barely any impact or

readership. One can only agree with Sari Hanafi’s observations about the
pervasive impact of the foreign donors in settings the research agendas
and how the prioritizing of consultancy has hurt scholarship. Interest-
ingly, Hanafi refers to the currently much debated 1990 conference or-
ganized by Saad Edin Ibrahim’s Ibn Khaldun Center for Development
Studies on the Copts as a minority. The conference was strongly attacked
by several intellectuals not only because it was supported by foreign
funds, but also over the question of whether or not the Copts should have
been designated as a minority. The conference was then used by Hanafi
as an example to pinpoint that there are clashing interests between local
and foreign research agendas (Hanafi 2009).
In addition to the opposition from other intellectuals, Ibrahim faced
hostility from the government because he brought public attention to the
violent confessional events taking place at the time in the village of al-
Kush in Upper Egypt. Importantly, in a book he later published on the
question of minorities (Ibrahim 1992),13 Ibrahim starts with the following
premise: namely, that the Arab-Israeli conflict did not produce as many
victims as ethnic and confessional conflicts in the Middle East. He argues
that the Arab-Israeli conflict produced 150,000 deaths, whereas civil wars
in only three Arab countries—Iraq, Lebanon and Sudan—produced half a
million victims; the same could be said, Ibrahim claims, about the finan-
cial costs of such conflicts which far surpassed those of the Arab-Israeli
conflict.14
The book starts with the simple question: why did Arab unification
fail? The cleavages amongst Arab countries were in fact exacerbated. Ac-
cording to the book’s argument, nationalist ideology failed to grasp the
Arab reality and its complex material and psychological intricacies. It
failed to understand the spirit of the nation. Arab unity was hampered by
its elites, who failed to understand existing structural contradictions. That
nationalist thinking did not address the social roles of these ethnic entities.
Ibrahim is obviously right in this claim; however, many were troubled by
the premise that the Arab Israeli conflict was secondary in human and
financial cost to Arab civil wars.
Kamel El Sayyed, there are 30 research centers specializing in political and stra-
tegic studies.
13
He also published an extensive volume of some 950 pages, titled al-milal wal
nihal. (See Appendix II). In this study, Ibrahim explains that he had great trouble
in publishing it because of the uproar the conference produced. It is nevertheless
a thorough historical and sociological survey of minorities in the Arab world.
14
Suzan Mubarak is thanked in this work over and above in the thick volume of
al-millal wal nihal for having been his faithful assistant.
However, let us return to the issue of the neo-liberal agenda in aca-

demia. The liberalization of the sphere of education has led to an explo-
sion of lucrative private foreign and local universities that cater to the
better-off classes. Seeking education has turned into a consumption ex-
perience. One can choose between German, American, Canadian, French,
and British systems of education, and comparing university fees and
technical trainings that could open up opportunities in the overseas labour
market and in international companies located in Egypt, has become a
national sport.
I borrow Michael Burawoy’s concept of “Third Wave Marketization”
to argue that in our part of the world, the effects of marketization and the
commodification of sociology have become extremely pervasive (Bura-
woy 2007). In particular, this has been the case with the intervention of
development agencies, and funding for causes related to democracy, civil
society or poverty. With the case of Saad Eddin Ibrahim case, I wish to
show the limits and problems faced by social scientists when wavering
between market forces—that is, foreign funding and set research agen-
das—and political activism, within the confines of a complex relationship
with an authoritarian state which denies any function for the social sci-
ences apart from disciplining the unruly. And yet, there is a growing
market for a “scientistic”, quantitative market-oriented sociology.15
DOUBLE LANGUAGES AND PROFESSIONS
“Western educated”, well-trained Egyptian social scientists are today

more than ever in demand in the market for development. In fact, they
seem to be overworked and are doing well. I know from my colleagues
that they are often over-solicited by foreign donors to conduct research on
poverty, peasantry, education and other acute problems. Often, a capable
social scientist has become a rarity in high demand. However, this tells
only one side of the story and discards the thousands of jobless graduates
of Egyptian universities, who can hardly start any career with their train-
ing and who in the past have ended up as translators and foreign language
teachers. Anthropologist Hania Sholkamy (1999) writes the following
about the state of anthropology in Egypt today:
Anthropology has been ‘born again’ in Egypt. National policy makers

and international donors working in Egypt (and perhaps elsewhere)
15
Hania Sholkamy argues that today, qualitative research as well as research
oriented towards focus groups are experiencing a boom in Egypt.
192 Mona Abaza
have an increasing awareness of the contribution that anthropology can

make to social research and human understanding. In fields as diverse
as health sciences and medicine, demography, and other population sci-
ences, ecological and environmental research and advo-
cacy…anthropologists who had barely been humoured previously are
now sought and heard. But on closer inspection one finds that anthro-
pology has been born again as a collection of qualitative meth-
ods………Quasi-anthropological techniques are in demand, not anthro-
pology with its precepts and concepts. (119)
One also needs to differentiate between the English language produc-

tion for international consumption and the Arabic market. Each market
targets a different readership and different concerns. Hania Sholkamy
addressed the issue of the crisis in Egyptian sociology in terms of reader-
ship and consumption, concluding that Arabic readers and consumers do
pose a serious problem in the reception of critical sociological imagina-
tion, since critical findings can be disturbing and perceived as insulting
(Sholkamy 1999). Thus many of us are faced with the dilemma of want-
ing to communicate with readers and colleagues that are far from ready to
accept our findings. This could then explain why many of us find our-
selves in a situation of double discourses according to the language we
are using. If we write in English we certainly aspire to target the interna-
tional community where we are much less likely to face restrictions and
censorship. Because he publishes in several different languages, Saad
Eddin Ibrahim has been recurrently attacked by his enemies for maintain-
ing multiple discourses. Addressing different audiences often meant
maintaining nuanced views, and perhaps also different vested interests.
Since there is neither a significant academic audience, nor a large reader-
ship for sociological production in the Arab World, let alone, specialised
academic Arab journals, it is not a coincidence that academics resort to
using the media and the press in order to communicate with wider Arab
audiences. They end up writing in lay language and using the populist
style that appeals to the press. These academics are invited to talk shows
on al-Jazira channel or the dozens of other successful Arab channels.
Equally, be it journalists or academics at local universities, writing for the
press has become an important way of earning one’s living.
It is possible to argue that the public figure has quickly replaced the
academic. One can make a bet that most of the bestselling books pub-
lished by the leading Egyptians intellectuals and academics in Egypt are
basically newspapers articles that turn to be compiled in volumes. The
style is easier and quicker to publish.
SAAD EDDIN IBRAHIM

CONNECTING THE MARKET WITH POLITICAL ACTIVISM.
“One does not play with wolves.” -- Mohammed al-Gohari
When Saad Eddin Ibrahim was taken to jail for the first time in 2000, he
was a tenured, internationally known professor at the American Univer-
sity in Cairo. He was well-published in Arabic and English and had a
long list of edited volumes. The fact that he holds a double Egyptian-
American nationality, which implied benefits and privileges, was repeat-
edly mentioned in the press as a disadvantage, as if he had troubled dou-
ble loyalties. When Nasser stripped him of his Egyptian nationality in the
sixties, he was a student in the US. Ibrahim was punished by the Nasser
regime after having expressed strong disappointment with the military
regime. For some nationalists and leftists, this has been seen as yet again
another suspicious incident. The status of such a private institution of
learning as the American University in Cairo is noteworthy: it is consid-
ered an oasis of privilege compared to the national system of higher edu-
cation. Indeed, the university’s higher salaries (competitive with overseas
standards), the high quality of its research facilities, its sophisticated li-
brary and the bookshop holding abundant English speaking publications
on the region are all reasons to speak of two higher education systems:
one elitist and foreign influenced versus the less privileged national edu-
cation system. These are all reasons why Ibrahim was not only resented
by national sociologists but also regarded by them as an outsider who did
not need to play the internal power games of the Cairo, Helwan and Ain
Sham Universities. Perhaps, because he did not really care about follow-
ing the hierarchical chain of the transmission of sociological knowledge,
Ibrahim was labeled as arrogant.
It is important to be reminded that Ibrahim was one of the most suc-
cessful sociologists in obtaining large (foreign) funds for organizing con-
ferences and research. He was a tycoon in the world of research and de-
velopment. 16 For many, his success was a source of envy, because he
16
In the early eighties al-Ahram al-Iqtissadi weekly opened fire about the impact
of foreign funding on research and in particular the role of the Ford Foundation.
At the time, the Foundation funded projects at Cairo University and al-Ahram
Center for Strategic Studies concerning Egypt’s foreign policy options and the
role of the Egyptian bureaucracy. According to Ann Lesch, who was the officer
of the Ford Foundation from 1977-1984 and in Cairo from 1980 to 1984, Saad
Eddin Ibrahim was receiving funds at the time from the World Bank. Nonethe-
194 Mona Abaza
tackled many daring problems such as the ones related to the Coptic “mi-
nority” and the confessional sedition, democracy, and civil society. Fur-
thermore, he has been very prolific in publishing in Arabic in both the
press and the academic field. In earlier times he was amongst the first
sociologists to work on the perceptions of Arab nationalism, on urban
problems and he became famous through his work on militant Islam.
Ibrahim was one of the most intelligent and up-to-date sociologists of his
generation. The Ibn Khaldun Center published significant and novel data
about political violence, showing that among those killed, there were far
more terrorists who died than police officers. The publications of the cen-
ter provided valuable information on the state of politics and society and
they were solicited by numerous international donors.
Saad Eddin Ibrahim has stirred many controversies not only amongst
government circles but even more so within the Egyptian intelligentsia,
particularly amongst leftist and nationalist circles. In fact, many would
argue that his unpopularity and the fact that his jailing neither produced
an outcry nor general support from intellectuals is bewildering. Is it that
the civil society he aspired to cultivate, turned out to be totally marginal-
ized? Is it that civil society is itself conservative and well-indoctrinated
with the propaganda produced by regime machinery? Is it the fact that
Ibrahim played on too many dangerous registers including showing
strong support for the Americans? Was this a major factor that led a large
section of intellectuals to draw back their support for him? Or was the
ambivalence simply driven by the fact that he was a tycoon in the world
of research? A tycoon who accumulated obvious material capital, fame
and international attention. A tycoon who managed a center and organ-
ized successful conferences, talks and publications and employed numer-
ous research assistants and whose academic enterprise involved a lot of
money. A tycoon, who held a monopoly over the donor and funding
scene. A tycoon who was brilliant in speaking the language of the West:
the language of democracy, of human rights and of civil society. But in
the Marxist-nationalist worldview, tycoons do not necessarily work that
well together with the discourse of justice and equality. Many saw private
interests, fame, media attention and the accumulation of wealth as the
prime motive behind Ibrahim’s actions. When he compared himself to
Nelson Mandela, many intellectuals expressed anger, feeling that the
comparison was inappropriate. Some would recall that when Ibrahim first
published his empirical findings on the militant Islamic groups in the
less, he wrote an article criticizing foreign funding in Egypt, which undermined

his credibility (Personal communication with Ann Lesch, May 2, 2009).
eighties,17 he had stirred the resentment of the project’s co-members who

had helped him conduct intensive interviews in jail. The project on Is-
lamic militants was originally meant to be conducted by a collaborative
research team sponsored by the national Center for Sociological and
Criminological Research. Apparently, Ibrahim appropriated the findings -
and he was the only sociologist - or rather he was credited as being the
first sociologist to publish on Islamists in English at that time.18 The clash
between Ibrahim and Ahmed Khalifa, the director of the Center for So-
ciological and Criminological Research at the time, exploded, making
national newspaper headlines. Here, again, Ibrahim’s American citizen-
ship was brought up in reference to the question of how far the state
could allow information gathering about imprisoned Islamists. It seems
that at the time, Ibrahim had already collaborated with the Ford Founda-
tion in Egypt, which again raised questions about the role of foreign fund-
ing. Still, however, do these previous events in Ibrahim’s history consti-
tute a sufficient reason for his jailing and public humiliation in the nine-
ties?
It’s unclear to me why Ibrahim’s unpopularity continued well after
his release.19 But one thing is clear: Ibrahim’s case did not produce much
support from nationalists and left-wing intellectuals. There were a few
exceptions, however, including Said al-Naggar, Kamal Abul Magd and
Abdel Moneim Said, all of whom presented their testimonies at trial. Late
Mohammed Sid Ahmed, a journalist, Mohammed al Sayyed Said, a re-
searcher, late al-Wafd deputy Ibrahim Abaza, and former Ambassador
17
See Ibrahim 1996. In addition, his article entitled “Anatomy of Egypt’s Mili-
tant Groups: Methodological Notes and Preliminary Findings,” first appeared in
the International Journal of Middle East Studies, volume 12 in 1980. Further-
more, the reader which he helped compile with Nicholas Hopkins, Arab Society
in Transition, Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 1977, formed many
generations of AUCians who are regarded as today’s political and cultural Egyp-
tian elite.
18
Although he does acknowledge in Ibrahim (1980) that his findings are part of
team research.
19
However, Egyptian regional and international human rights organizations ex-
pressed protest and defended Saad Edin Ibrahim. See for instance, the statement
of the Arab Program for Human Rights Activists (APA) issued on 24/5/2001.
The statement raised several important questions, including: What is the signifi-
cance of the trial precisely at that point? Does the government want to punish a
“big man to frighten the small people”? Does it wish to silence all human rights
organisations? Or does the trial have something to do with Ibrahim’s double na-
tionality and therefore is it a way for the state to publicly express its authority to
imprison Americans in Egypt? Or is the trial a way to prepare the ground for
passing a new law to further harass the activities of NGOs and human rights ac-
tivists?
196 Mona Abaza
Hussein Ahmed Amin defended Ibrahim. Most importantly, Issam al-

Aryaan, a leading figure in the Muslim Brothers, strongly defended Ibra-
him, having himself been incarcerated for several years. However, Ibra-
him’s unpopularity in intellectual circles continues into today. 20 The
skirmishes between opponents of the regime and Ibrahim still continue.
This reveals that his image in Western media as “championing democ-
racy” is much more nuanced in reality. It is not astonishing that several
“leftist” intellectuals did align themselves with the government against
Ibrahim because they considered American intervention in his favour as a
form of American imperialist bullying in local affairs. For example, when
75 members of the US Congress petitioned against the jailing of Ibrahim,
Al-Usbu’ newspaper characterized it as an insolent interference in na-
tional affairs, an argument praised by leftists and nationalists. The con-
gressmen’s petition was again reported as yet another pro-Israeli Lobby
campaign (Al-Usbu’, July 9, 2001). The government played the national-
ist card several times. Thomas Friedman also defended Ibrahim by pub-
licly stating that the trial was a “sham” and a “travesty” (El Magd 2001).
Instead of tarnishing Egypt’s image, Americans “should be” proud of
Ibrahim. In short, it looked like an ongoing war between the biggest su-
perpower in the world and its second largest aid recipient and ally in the
region.
Saad Eddin Ibrahim went to Israel and received invitations to give
talks there. This move was considered a major betrayal of Egypt for some.
Others saw it as typical of Ibrahim’s eccentricity to include, for example,
in his most recent tour before his exile, Sheikh Nasralahh, the leader of
Hizb Allah. Ibrahim argued that change could not be generated from in-
side because society was stagnant and devoid of dynamic agents of
change. Thus, he believed that the American invasion of Iraq would trig-
ger a wave of democratization and shake the Arab regimes out of their
state of inertia. This is an argument that has been promoted in recent
years by new liberals in the Middle East. Others saw the change-from-
outside argument as a familiar Marxist stance similar to the conclusion
that colonialism brings its own contradictory seeds of destruction. How-
ever, for many, this position was taken as a great betrayal of the Middle
20
The Marxist philosopher Mahmud Amin al ‘Alem, and the novelist Moham-
med al-Bussati expressed strong antipathy towards Ibrahim. They praised the
government for taking a firm stance against Americans who arrogantly interfere
in Egyptian politics (al-Mussawar, January 6, 2001). Those who expressed an-
tagonistic sentiments against Ibrahim included Sayyed Yassin (the former direc-
tor of the center for Strategic studies, and who worked closely with Ibrahim for
years in Jordan), Nader Fergany (economist) and Mohammed Abul Ghar, (a
leading figure in the opposition national Universities movement of 9th of March.)
East and a sign of full-fledged support for the Bush neo-imperialist ad-
ministration. The fact that neo-cons in Iraq consulted Ibrahim was yet
again reason to attack him.
For many years, Saad Eddin Ibrahim was close to the Egyptian re-
gime. He had close friendships with several high officials and ministers
21
who studied with him in the US. His book (1992a) on Anwar al-Sadat
is crucial in understanding his rapport with the power structure. A few
month before Sadat´s assassination, Ibrahim was approached by Sadat’s
wife, Gihan al-Sadat who Ibrahim described in his book as a witty, bright
and attractive lady. She obviously organized the meeting with Ibrahim in
hopes of soliciting his help in creating a reconciliation between the intel-
ligentsia and Sadat, but her plan clearly failed. Ibrahim wrote again a
highly controversial book on Sadat, published ten years after Sadat’s
death, in which Ibrahim describes the only two memorable encounters
with the late president. The first encounter was when Ibrahim was still
studying in the US in 1966. Already in this perioda, Ibrahim was highly
disturbed by Sadat’s high admiration of the US, even though he was visit-
ing the country as member of the revolutionary council. Ibrahim had then
predicted that if Sadat were to come to power, he would be the strongest
promoter of a pro-American policy. Ibrahim’s second encounter with Sa-
dat happened in August 1981, (barely two months before the assassina-
tion) when Sadat apparently wanted to learn more about the Egyptian
opposition and about Ibrahim’s critical writings against the regime. Ac-
cording to Ibrahim, it was clear that Sadat was not at all happy with Ibra-
him’s political analyses regarding the Islamic opposition. It was also clear
that Sadat felt threatened by the opposition. Accordingly, Sadat wanted to
take violent measures, which he conveyed to Ibrahim in an unpleasant
manner. Nevertheless, Sadat wanted to still test his popularity or rather
unpopularity amongst the Egyptian intelligentsia with Ibrahim.22 It seems
that Sadat wanted Ibrahim to organize negotiations and dialogues be-
tween the oppositional Arab intellectuals and himself. Just a month after
this encounter, in September, Sadat jailed nearly 1,500 intellectuals (in-
cluding Muslims, Copts and leftists). Sadat’s action revealed that he
21
One can mention here Ali Eddin Hilal, a former professor of political science,
who closely collaborated with Ibrahim in earlier times and became Minister of
Youth during Mubarak’s rule.
22
Among the jailed were feminist Nawal Al-Saadawi, known Nasserite journal-
ist Hassanein Haykal, former Minister Ismail Sabri Abdallah, Marxists like Lutfi
al Khuli and Amina Rashid, members of the Islamic groups, Pope Shenuda, as
well as many other public figures. Perhaps I am wrong but Ibrahim seems to
minimize the effect of the “autumn of wrath” as a major political event that fol-
lowed his meeting with Sadat.
198 Mona Abaza
hardly intended to create a dialogue with his opposition. At the time,

many jokes were made about how no intellectual managed to escape in-
carceration. Luckily, Ibrahim was not jailed.
Ibrahim narrates that he waited approximately ten years before he de-
cided to publish the book, because he wanted to avoid both those who
either falsely praised or cursed Sadat. The book then attempts to reinstate
Sadat, who has been portrayed as either merely a traitor because he
signed a peace deal with Israel, or a hero. Ibrahim then attempts to com-
pare and draw criticisms of both Nasser and Sadat’s regimes by empha-
sizing how these long years of military rule erased any possibility of dia-
logue and objective evaluations.
In fact, in his recently published memoirs, Ibrahim does not hide that
he asked Suzan Mubarak to help place his relative in the military acad-
emy, tellingly illustrating how he himself profited from the favouritism of
the system. For many years, Ibrahim was perceived as belonging to the
establishment. Also, he was amongst the first to propose to the regime the
rehabilitation of repentant terrorists into society. Whenever an American
delegation was visiting Cairo, the Ibn Khaldun Center took them for a
tour in the popular quarter of Imbaba to meet the rehabilitated Islamists
who worked with him. Suzan Mubarak did her Masters degree in sociol-
ogy at the American University in Cairo under his supervision. Further-
more, Ibrahim was for several years the advisor to Crown Prince Hassan
of Jordan. He had created an institutional cultural and publication project
with the Kuweiti Princess Suad al-Sabbah and some other writers and
intellectuals who became known for its troublesome termination. His
close contact with several highly placed politicians and well known fig-
ures such as Sheikhah Moza23 has been subject to many attacks by several
intellectuals, years before the case exploded. It is not a coincidence that
in the two books he has published on minorities in the Middle East, Ibra-
him has thanked Suzanne Mubarak, his student, for having helped him in
gathering data (Ibrahim 1992b).
Another crucial work (2000) by Ibrahim that is worth mentioning in
this context is The Thinker and Power. Ironically, read with a contempo-
rary lens, it could be perceived as a soothsaying for what followed for
Ibrahim. The book opens with a play of two words that sound alike—“al-
baheth wal mabaheth”—meaning the researcher and the internal security
forces, to explain the differences and similarities between these two pro-
23
Sheikhah Moza of Qatar is portrayed as a promoter of gender equality and a
philanthropist sponsoring advanced technology. She is known for having
launched the Doha debates which were inspired by the Oxford Union. Moza has
been advertised recently by the Ibn Khaldun Center as a pioneer of democratiza-
tion. See Ibn Khaldun Center (2009).
fessions. Al-Baheth (the researcher) wal-mabaheth (the internal security

employee) both bear similarities in their search for truth. Both search for
documents and information. Both start with premises from which they
reach conclusions; however, the difference is that the researcher exposes
his conclusion to the public in conference, articles and studies. His main
goal is to seek knowledge whereas the mabaheth (internal security em-
ployee) keeps his information for himself and his main aim is “security.”
The researcher publishes his sources and publicizes the ways in which he
collected his information. Moreover, the committed researcher is often
interested in conducting research in sensitive areas, like religious fanati-
cism, class conflict and religious intolerance, which often raises suspicion.
But the researcher‘s central concern is to create and disseminate knowl-
edge. The irony is that precisely such an introduction to counsel rulers did
not spare Ibrahim from being attacked later for being a traitor and an “in-
formant” to foreign states. The chapter titled “Narrowing the Gap be-
tween the Prince and the Intellectual” could be read as yet again a reple-
tion of the same idea, namely, “how to advise regimes” on how to man-
age and integrate in the system the growing militant opposition. Ibrahim
refers to the Japanese reformists of the 19th century to argue that change
was brought forth via the alliance of the intellectual and the ruling elites.
The Fabians in England played a similar role in public life.24
Additionally, Ibrahim is a “mediatic” figure. He is very often sought
out to give talks on television, and is well cited in the American press
such as The Washington Post and The New York Times.25 After his re-
lease, he relied heavily on the American press to continue putting pres-
sure on the Egyptian regime to the point that US aid to Egypt became
associated with his trial. He is jet-setting scholar, from whom Arab politi-
24
The rest of the book consists of a collection of articles, published earlier in al-
Ahram, al-Ahram al-Iqtissadi, and Civil Society, and dialogues that took place in
Arab Thought (Muntada al-Fikr al-‘Arabi), Amman, Jordan. The articles are
mildly critical of Mubarak, but in general they seem to be supportive of him, if
not in praise of him. The vindictive tone and personal attack of the President can
be traced to period after Ibrahim’s imprisonment.
25
See for instance the article on Ibrahim’s imprisonment by Mary Anne Weaver
(The New York Times Magazine, June 17, 2001). Weaver’s article provided a
strong criticism of the regime’s authoritarian politics and its tendency to jail its
biggest opposition group, the Muslim Brothers. The article produced a strong
resentment in Egyptian official circles. The regime took it as an affront precisely
when Ahmed Maher, the Minister for Foreign Affairs was preparing his visit to
the US. He then issued a statement that “Egypt will not allow any interference in
its internal affairs. Nobody should imagine that pressure can be put on us” (al-
Hayat, June 18, 2001). See also Amany Radwan’s article, “Having the last
Laugh: A Wise-Cracking article may have triggered the arrest of a leading Egyp-
tian Human Rights Activist” (Time, May, 21, 2001).
200 Mona Abaza
cians and the American establishment constantly solicit advice. The

memorable encounter with Bush during the past few years was one rea-
son why he was then advised to stay in exile after his release from jail.
It is true that during the trial the yellow press played a devastating
role in smearing26 Ibrahim’s reputation, making him out to be a spy and
an agent of foreign powers. But that is not the whole story. To many, his
personality and his tendency to constantly resort to Western media be-
came bothersome. The Marxist intellectual Farida al-Naqquash, and a
member of the leftist-Nasserite coalition party the Tagamu’, together with
the leader of the 9th of March protest movement, Mohammed Abul-Ghar,
recently opened fire on Ibrahim. Both characterized him as the region’s
“man of the Americans” and an unconditional admirer of the American
system. Ibrahim himself narrated this attack. In addition, he challenged
Abul-Ghar by arguing that although they had not met personally, Ibrahim
had read Abul-Ghar’s works and was very well informed about his activi-
ties, which he held in high esteem. However, Ibrahim insisted that Abul-
Ghar merely repeated populist false ideas about him. Ibrahim then dedi-
cates the rest of his article to demonstrating how he others had misunder-
stood him and how he has always been critical of Americans (al-Dustur,
February 18, 2009). These settling of accounts, however, with the leftist
nationalist intelligentsia were taking place in the opposition newspapers
of al-Masry al-Yaum (February 21, 2009) and al-Dustur. Ibrahim de-
cided to publish his memoirs in al-Dustur on a weekly basis; by doing
this, it seems that Ibrahim is responding to the allegations that the Ameri-
can Embassy had intervened directly in the case, by putting pressure on
the Egyptian legal system. Moreover, talk circulated that the US would
halt aid to Egypt because of Ibrahim’s exile. Ibrahim recalled precisely
which Ambassador visited him in jail and the exact number of times he
was visited. He then emphasized that he warned the American Ambassa-
dor to reduce the frequency of his visits so as to not exacerbate the situa-
tion. The appearance of these memoirs coincide with other front page
newspapers statements that Obama has been recently putting pressure on
Mubarak to release political prisoners including the founder of the
banned party al-Ghad, Ayman Nur (jailed nearly four years ago for pre-
senting himself as a presidential candidacy) and allowing the return of
Ibrahim as a way of reinstating democracy (al-Shuruq, February 21,
2009).
26
Al-Usbu’ newspaper was the most ferocious in its attacks, as well the tabloid
weekly Rosa al-Youssef, which cheaply lumped together former actresses and
belly dancers who reconverted to Islam and wore the headscarf, fanatic preachers,
together with Saad Eddin Ibrahim. See Rosa al-Youssef (September 6, 2001).
FAILED PROMISES OF EGYPTIAN SOCIOLOGY
“As a formal academic discipline, sociology was first offered in the

newly established (1908) secular Egyptian University in 1913 only 20
years after the University of Chicago (1892), 7 years after the University
of Paris (1906), and 6 years after the London school of Economics and
Political Science. Indeed, Cairo’s Egyptian University introduced sociol-
ogy ahead of most Western European Universities, which did so only af-
ter World War I. Scandinavian universities had no professorships of soci-
ology until after World War II” (Ibrahim 1997: 547).
All social scientists working on Egypt tend to express disappointment
about how the field of sociology could have turned into a wonder, but
failed to do so. All also agree that sociology in Egypt could have been on
par with Western traditions when we are reminded of the significance of
the presence of Saint Simonians in Egypt as early as the 1820s. They
seemed to have influenced the grand transformations that led up to the
creation of modern Egypt under the rule of Mohammed Ali (1776-1849).
We are told by Ibrahim again that it was the Saint Simonians who were
behind the massive reform projects in irrigation, public health and infra-
structure. Mohammed Ali was inspired by Comtian notions of “order”
and “progress” which led him to send students to France and implement
systems of discipline and rule (Ibrahim 1997). There is much debate
amongst historians on whether Saint-Simonians were successful in Egypt.
One thing however is clear: according to the French historian Ghislaine
Alleaume, the Saint-Simonians played a crucial role in forming the first
generation of engineers and technicians. They clearly influenced one of
Egypt’s first technocrats and modernizers, Ali Mubarak, by shaping his
vision of public works. They also played a pervasive role in creating
polytechnic and artillery schools (Alleaume 2002).
Alain Roussillon and Saad Eddin Ibrahim insisted that the first gen-
eration of Egyptian sociologists were mainly influenced by Emile Durk-
heim and his nephew Marcel Mauss when they were students in Paris.27
One of the most well known students was the blind Azharite Taha Hus-
sain who wrote his PhD thesis on Ibn Khaldun with Emile Durkheim.
Roussillon made the observation that the pioneers of Egyptian sociology
including Mansur Fahmi and ‘Abdel ‘Aziz ‘Ezzat, were all trained in
France. But from the moment of its birth, sociology was tainted by re-
formism; teaching sociology at the then young Cairo University had to
play a cohesive role in society. It was understood as merging of interests
of the palace and nationalist forces by redefining a national identity in a
27
Ibrahim mentions that Marcel Mauss taught in Cairo in the thirties.
202 Mona Abaza
colonial context. According to Roussillon, Egyptian sociology’s very re-

formist premise was one reason why sociology remained entrapped in a
linear vision of progress. Sociology was then understood as a science that
would help narrow the gap between two worlds—the European and
Egyptian societies—through the application of sociological laws.
Mohammed al-Gohari is another sociologist who sees that the field’s
problems today can be traced to the conservative worldview of the early
generation of sociologists of the twenties. Clearly, social engineering was
enforced through a claim of objectivism. According to al-Gohari, ‘Abdel
‘Aziz ‘Ezzat often told his students at Cairo University that they had to be
social engineers in the literal sense of the word (intum mohandessin
ijtima’iin). Al-Gohari remarks that compared to contemporary Egyptian
philosophers who were much more able to raise fundamental questions,
the sociologists of the time remained conservative because they insisted
on an “artificial understanding of objectivism.” 28
Al-Gohari insists the social sciences were most damaged by the 1952
revolution when a law was passed decreeing that any researcher wanting
to undertake research had first obtain permission from CAMPAS (Cen-
tral Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics) which was run by an
officer under the Egyptian military regime. This was the moment that
marked the beginning of the “criminalization of collecting data and con-
ducting research.” The revolution instituted a law making it illegal to
gather information that could harm the state. The law also put restrictions
on fieldwork and the collection of statistics. The researcher could only
gather information that was limited to 50 units (or 50 persons) per re-
search proposal. All questionnaires had to be approved by the govern-
ment. According to al-Gohari, this law, passed in the 1950s was what
initial triggered the association of sociological investigation with spying
and information-gathering for the “enemy”—in other words, Israel.29 All
in all, the law meant the criminalization of the profession and from which
we continue to suffer today. This was yet again part and parcel of the au-
thoritarian system’s efforts to silence protesting voices. As a result, sev-
eral Egyptian PhD candidates at American Universities experienced a lot
of trouble while doing their field research in Egypt. Their field notes were
confiscated (at times during their flight to the US to complete their PhDs),
and returned only after they were reviewed by highly-placed government
officials.
28
It is unclear what really Gohari meant by this statement.
29
We should remember that the state of Israel was already created by this time.
The 1948 war and the memory of British colonialism were reasons why the mili-
tary felt threatened.
Nearly half a century after this law was passed, Hania Sholkamy
(1999) today writes the following:
To obtain a research permit in Egypt, a researcher is required to apply

at the Center for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAMPAS). Appli-
cations must include some basic documentation and a variable sum of
money for processing. Those who can obtain a cover to do research, in
the form of an official or official-looking letter, generally avoid the
procedure. However, doing fieldwork without the requisite license is a
public crime. Part of the documentation required is a written question-
naire. This document is given priority since it is supposed to reflect the
intentions of the researcher and research. Obviously it is not an impos-
sible request. Many myself included, who have had no intention of us-
ing a questionnaire have made up a mock one to satisfy this require-
ment. (127-128)
Al-Gohari argues that the system institutionalized the suppression of

information, even when the government commissioned these studies. Sci-
entific investigation lost all value as a consequence. This was clear when
the government commissioned several sociologists to undertake research
on the state of the army after the 1967 defeat. When the government real-
ized that the findings were too critical of the regime, they ordered the dis-
appearance of thousands of questionnaires and valuable documents. Al-
Gohari remarked how demoralised the team was when they realised that
long years of work had been thrown away; nothing has been published on
the army since then. A study on poverty sponsored by the National Insti-
tute for Planning (Ma’had al-takhtit al-Qawmi) is another example cited
by Al-Gohari. After this study was completed, Minister al-Ganzuri called
upon the responsible researcher and reproached him: the study’s finding
that 36% of the population lived under the poverty line could not be pub-
lished. After negotiations with the government, the government statistic
ended up stating that the poverty level was only at 19 %. Al-Gohari con-
cludes that sociologists are constantly negotiating over scientific scales
and facts, in an effort to adapt their findings to the national level political
reality (tafawud siyassi litakhfid nisba ‘ilmiyya).
Al-Gohari considers himself to be “a man of the regime.” Even as a
highly placed state functionary responsible for coordinating research in
all Egyptian universities and as a former President of Helwan University
and Dean of the Faculty of Literature at Cairo University, on several oc-
casions, the regime has clearly conveyed to him that his knowledge is
ultimately useless. For example, when peasant rebellions spread in the
early nineties with the new law tenancies, al-Gohari offered to study the
204 Mona Abaza
relationship between landlords and tenants. He even proposed to the gov-

ernment alternative peaceful solutions for the implementation of security
measures. His research was never taken into consideration. Every soci-
ologist who approached the regime with projects and solutions or in
hopes of working in the official state apparatus was rejected. All of them
obtained a clear rejection and their research was either discarded or con-
fiscated. This might explain why social scientists often missed out on op-
portunities to provide critical analyses of major issues. The most obvious
example was when the National Research Center for Social Research un-
dertook a study on the sexual behaviour of women in Egypt conducted by
a group of distinguished psychologists and anthropologists. The research
was strongly attacked by the official press because it was debunking ta-
boos. The government ordered the project to be halted; the study was
only rescued as a result of Gihan al-Sadat’s intervention. A retired pro-
fessor of sociology, Nicholas Hopkins, who has lived in Egypt for almost
three decades, has a different opinion, however. According to him, the
failures of Egyptian sociology have less to do with state interference and
more to do with the nature of the field itself: he finds the discipline to be
insufficiently analytical. Hopkins argues that sociology has tended to fo-
cus on society as a totality rather than looking at different parts in con-
trast to each other. This can equally explain why class analysis has not
prospered, according to him. If Marxism was applied, it was done so in a
mechanical popular way. Thus sociologists who took up subjects like
communities or ethnicity or gender were then suspected of trying to di-
vide the country. However, the major drawback is really “the absence of
a forum for intellectual discourse, whether about social problems or
social theory.…. There is no real criticism of methods and approaches,
much like there is no systematic review of work and projects so that the
good is encouraged and the bad eliminated” (Personal communication
with Nicholas Hopkins, March 3, 2009).
THE CONTINUED CRIMINALIZATION OF SOCIOLOGY
The real reason behind Ibrahim’s incarceration was that he crossed the
line when he provided the media with sardonic statements about the far-
cical nature of political succession in the Middle East. Ibrahim spoke of
the emerging regimes of Gumlukiyya (a joint word between jumhuriyya,
republic and malakiyya, meaning royalty) i.e. the return of a generation of
royalties as offspring of (military) republics.
Ibrahim argues that he made a comparison between two royal re-
gimes, Morocco and Jordan, with five republics to conclude that while
these republics started with promising revolutions, they have aged badly.
Over time, these regimes have become increasingly more authoritarian
and corrupt (al-Hayat, January 20, 2004).
Furthermore, he appeared frequently on American media with highly
acerbic criticism of the Egyptian regime. In The Wall Street Journal,
Ibrahim portrayed Mubarak as the Pharaoh keen on maintaining an image
of himself as healthy. Ibrahim mockingly stated that Mubarak and the rest
of his ageing cabinet were in fact dyeing their greying hair. These re-
marks were made when the president fainted during a speech he was de-
livering in parliament. 30 Ibrahim thought he was immune, but he was
wrong. Others have mentioned Ibrahim’s arrest was motivated by his at-
tempt to monitor the parliamentary elections whose results were found to
be fraudulent. Right in the middle of the trial another charge was filed
against Ibrahim for allegedly instigating the violent confessional killings,
which had occurred in the village of al-Kush in Upper Egypt. The argu-
ment was that Ibrahim inflamed public opinion with false information
both in the country and in international forums about the mistreatment of
the Coptic minority.
CONCLUSION
What lessons can we draw from Ibrahim’s case concerning the future of
sociology in a third world country like Egypt? First, the media’s smear
campaign against Ibrahim reinforced the systematic association between
espionage and sociological investigation. As a result, in the popular
imagination, sociology has become synonymous with spying. In 2008,
another charge was filed against Ibrahim for being a “traitor” and for his
alleged collaboration with foreign forces. Following the same chain of
associations, although the privatization of research undermines agenda-
setting, foreign donors should not be radically condemned. Given the de-
clining budgets for university research worldwide, given also the sad
working conditions in Egyptian national universities and the lack of con-
cern for research, these foreign donors are still one major alternative for
academics to buy time and dedicate themselves to research. The national-
ists have tended to often demonize all foreign funding. In particular,
funds from the Ford Foundation are held with suspicion and assumed to
come from an institution with a hidden agenda, given its history. Unfor-
tunately, this viewpoint dismisses the fact that the institution’s policies
30
The article was reproduced in the issue of Civil Society and Democratization
in the Arab World, July 2004, vol. 10, issue no. 116.
206 Mona Abaza
regarding whom they fund and for what purposes has significantly
changed over the past two decades. Indeed, in the last few years, the Ford
Foundation has funded several interesting cultural, artistic and academic
projects which have little to do with the world of consulting and devel-
opment agencies. Unfortunately, however, a simplistic understanding of
“good” versus the “evil” exists in reference to foreign funding. Second,
the press raised many concerns among academics who felt alarmed by the
implications of Ibrahim’s trial on academic life. For instance, during the
trial, Ibrahim was reproached for having presented papers dealing with
sensitive political issues in international conferences. Participation in
such conferences and the exchange of knowledge more generally was
framed as “selling information” as though the expression of critical ideas
overseas automatically meant compromising Egypt’s “national interest.”
There was also concern expressed about foreign scholarships for PhD
candidates. We all know that these scholarships are crucial for students
who wish to study overseas and they are considered to be a form of aid to
developing countries. Would this be yet another excuse for the establish-
ment to exercise control over PhD holders who they suspected of spread-
ing “false information” through their theses?
Third, the press claimed that Ibrahim was guilty of having undertaken
research and received funds from the European Union without having
obtained government permission. Ibrahim’s defenders responded with the
argument that such bureaucratic measures only applied to NGOs whereas
the Ibn Khaldun Center was registered as a private company (Cairo
Times, June 7-13, 2001). Time and again this is the same old story re-
peated since the 1952 military rule. Gohari who testified on behalf of
Ibrahim and who defended him as one of the most prominent sociologists
in the court, argued that Ibrahim could not be considered guilty for this
reason, since nearly 80% of all research in Egyptian universities are for-
eign funded (Hafiz 2002). The prominent researcher and journalist at al-
Ahram Center for Strategic Studies, Abdel Mon’em Said, defended Ibra-
him by arguing that the state-owned al-Ahram newspaper and research
center get 30% of its funds from abroad. The case further revealed how
dependent NGOs are on the authority of the military and the state. Ac-
cording to The Cairo Times, a 2002 court ruling decreed that NGOs as
well as the acceptance of unauthorized foreign funding can be forbidden
by military decree (Cairo Times, December 27-January 2, 2002). This
reveals one important point: namely, the ironic pairing of “ultra national-
istic” rhetoric of the government concerning foreign funds with the fact
that Egypt is the second largest US aid recipient in the Middle East after
Israel. The regime seems to want to maintain a double discourse to cope
with its complete material dependence on the West by punishing one of
its most clever interlocutors with the West. Ibrahim’s case nicely illus-
trates how despite the era of globalization and the withering away of bor-
ders, there is a revival of primordial sentiments.
An alternative reading of Ibrahim’s case is one that emphasizes the
regime’s willingness to sacrifice one of its men as soon as he challenged
the regime’s limits. This brings us to an argument made by the late politi-
cal scientist Ilya Harik regarding Ibrahim’s case: that guided despotism is
unjustifiable (al-Hayat, May 23, 2001). Ibrahim was for a long time re-
garded as an establishment intellectual. But his case revealed once more
the complete absence of a public vision amongst the political and intellec-
tual elites regarding injustice and oppression. The most dangerous sign
for civil society is when elites are submissive to the establishment and
opportunistic regarding the justification of despotism.
According to the classical argument justifying Mubarak’s guided au-
thoritarianism, many intellectuals support the government in its struggle
against the Muslim Brothers, who are portrayed as dangerous and unin-
terested in public opinion. Harik insists that for many intellectuals, the
Ibrahim case was confusing. It was perceived by intellectuals as a stupid
move on part of the government, even though Harik concluded neutrally
by arguing that civil society was reluctant in defending Ibrahim. This can
also mean that civil society can be more conservative than the ruler—a
problematic issue if one associates democracy with civil society.
One last question still remains. Bridging the gap between the intellec-
tuals and princes have so far proven to be a royal failure. Ibrahim’s case
reveals that the margin for protest and contestation is very thin. Perhaps,
Ibrahim miscalculated his influence by imagining that the Americans and
the international community would rescue him. In the end, they did res-
cue him: although he was sentenced to seven years in jail, he was re-
leased after only a couple of years.
Others saw it as yet another internal power struggle of the regime.
Ibrahim came out of this case as a media star in the West, but having cre-
ated more enemies among leftist-nationalist intellectuals. The harsh set-
tling of accounts between Ibrahim and these intellectuals and between
Ibrahim and the government continues to be documented by the Egyptian
press. But the story has not ended. After all, who knows if Obama will be
able to push for Ibrahim’s return to Egypt.
208 Mona Abaza
APPENDIX I: COURT RULING IN IBN KHALDUN CASE31
First defendant
1.Received donations without permission from the appropriate authority,

Chairman of the Board of Trustees of Ibn Khaldun Center for Develop-
ment Studies, the sum of 145.00 Euros, and in his capacity as Treasurer
of the Egyptian Women Electors Fund, affiliated to Ibn Khaldun Center,
the sum of 116,000 Euros from the European Union, without prior per-
mission, nor subsequent notification of the appropriate authority.
2. As an Egyptian national he deliberately propagated false information

and vicious rumours abroad, dealing with some internal conditions in the
country which would weaken State’s prestige and integrity. He an-
nounced several bits of information abroad dealing with vote rigging in
any elections that take place in the country as well as the existence of re-
ligious persecution in the way elaborated in the investigation.
3. Managed, by way of swindling, to seize the amounts indicated in the

investigation, which belonged to European Union. He made the EU be-
lieve in the existence of a false project and forged facts. He concluded
with a deal to fund Ibn Khaldun Center for development Studies and to
spend the money in the way defined by the grantor. He issued illusive
cheques alleging that they covered the salaries of the staff at the said cen-
ter. He fabricated 60,000 election cards for Egyptians, and bills of false
charges and expenses as the cost of obtaining those cards. Through such
swindling, he could seize grantor’s money. Pp. 2-3.
The Court
And since the court has been convinced by what came in the case and felt
satisfied with the investigation and the information extracted from the
documents which resume in that the first defendant, Saad Edin Mohamed
Ibrahim sought to establish and create the Ibn Khaldun Center, apparently
to act as a center for development studies, information was received from
Major Nasser Mohammed Mohieddin, of the State Security Investigation
Service, advising that the said Professor in his capacity as Chairman of
the Board of trustees of Ibn Khaldun Center, was using such activity as a
31
This is an informal translation of the court ruling (August-September, 2002),
reproduced here from Ford Foundation Documents, Courtesy of Barbara Ibrahim
and the Ford Foundation.
cover up for undermining the country’s prestige and inventing false mat-
ters against Egypt touching all its elements, Government, people, material
and moral foundations, in order to do harm to its integrity through suspi-
cious activities.
And as the officer continued his investigation to check the informa-
tion he received, the information, followed by the investigation, showed
that the first defendant concluded an accord with the EU under which the
latter funded a so-called Project of Political Education and Orientation of
Electors. It also provides to assist the Egyptian Women Electors Support
Service. In his pursuit to procure such funding, he propagated abroad
false information and vicious rumours about some internal conditions in
the country, pertaining to forging any elections that took place in the
country and the existence of religious persecution in it. He resorted to
swindling action vis-à-vis the EU, in collaboration with defendants
Nadia…
On checking such cards against the lists of electors at Security Ser-
vices, they were found to be forged. They also wrote statements about
getting election cards and bills involving charges and expenses due for
citizens in some Governorates, contrary to fact, and issued cheques of
illusive sums alleging to have paid them to staff at the center, but they
countersigned them and deposited the money in the personal accounts of
the first defendant, who sent the documents to the EU to make it believe
that effort was made and required funding. Through such swindling, he
managed as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of Ibn Khaldun Center, to
seize from the EU the sum of 145,000 Euros, and in his capacity as
Treasurer of the Egyptian Women Electors Service, to get 116,000 Euros,
without prior permission from the competent authority, nor did he subse-
quently advise such authority about that. P. 5-6.
APPENDIX II: WORKS OF SAAD EDDIN IBRAHIM

IN ARABIC LANGUAGE
Itijahat al-ra’i al-‘aam al-‘arabi nahw mas’alat al-wahda, dirasa may-

daniyya (Trends in Public Opinion Regarding Arab Unity, a Field
Study). Beirut: Marquaz dirasat al-wahda al-‘arabiyya, 1982.
Ta ‘amulaat fi mas’ alat al-aqualliyyat (Reflections about the Question of
Minorities). Marquaz Ibn Khaldun, 1992.
I’aadat al- i’ tibar lil ra’ I al-Sadat (Reconsidering, (or) Reinstating
President Sadat). Cairo: Dar al-Shuruq, 1992.
210 Mona Abaza
Al-milal wal-nihal, humum al-aqualliyaat fil watan al-‘arabi (The Con-

cern about Minorities in the Arab World) Cairo: Ibn Khaldun Center,
1994.
‘Ilm al-nakabat al-‘arabiyya fi idarat al-siraa’ al-‘arabi al-israili (The
Science of Disasters or Defeat in Administering the Arab-Israeli
Conflict). Cairo: Ibn Khaldun Center, 1998.
Al-muffakir wal sulta (The Intellectual and Power). Cairo: Dar Qabaa’ lil
tibaa’ wal nashr, 2000.
Azmat al-Muthaquafin wal thaquafa al-‘arabiyya (The Crisis of Intellec-
tuals and Arabic Culture). Cairo: Marquaz Ibn Khaldun, 2006.
Edited Volumes
Masr wal ‘uruba wa thawrat yulyu (Egypt, Arabism and the 1952 July
Revolution).Beirut: Marquaz al-Wahda al-Àrabiyya, 1982.
Azmat al-dimuqratiyya fil watan al-‘arabi (The Crisis of Democracy in
the Arab World). Beirut: Marquaz dirasat al-wahda al-‘arabiyya,
1987.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alleaume, G. “L´économie politique saint-simonienne et les élites

techniques de l´ègypte moderne.” In Ètudes Saint-Simonienes, edited
by Philippe Régnier, pp. 305-334. Lyon: Presses Universitaires de
Lyon, 2002.
Al-Gohari, M. “Qira’a naqdiyya fi tarikh ìlm al-ijtima (A Critical Read-
ing in the History of Social Sciences).” In al-majalah al-‘ilmiyyah,
Jamiyat al-Qahira, Cairo, 1990.
Al-Gohari, M. May 24, 2008. Garden City, Cairo.
Al-Nimnim, H. “Hal kaan al hukm qaassiyan?” (How Tough Were the
Charges?).
Al-Mussawar, January 6, 2001.
Al-Usbu’. July 9, 2001.
Burawoy, M. “The Future of Sociology” Sociological Bulletin of Indian
Sociological Society 56, no.83 (2007): 339-354.
Ibn Khaldun Center for Development Studies. Civil Society and Democra-
tization in the Arab World: 2004 Annual Report.
(http://www.eicds.org/english/publications/reports/annualreport05/egy
pt.htm).
El Ghobashy, M. “Speaking too soon.” Cairo Times, June 7-13, 2001, p. 7.
El-Ghitany, M. “What’s in a Center?” Al-Ahram Weekly, January 6-12,

2005: issue 724.
El Magd, N. A. “On the Next Chapter?” Al-Ahram Weekly, May 31, 2001.
Retrieved June 6, 2001. (http://weeklyahram.org.eg/2001/536/eg5.htm).
Ghazalla, I. and G. Sabbagh. “Arab Sociology Today: A View From
Within.” Annual Review of Sociology 12 (1986): 373-99.
Hafiz, A. A. “Muhakamat Saad Edin Ibrahim” (The Trial of Saad Eddin
Ibrahim). Cairo: Rosa al-Youssef, 2002: p. 261.
Hanafi, S. “Donor Community and the Market of Research Production
Framing and de Framing the Social Sciences.” Presented at the con-
ference of the Council of National Associations, March 23-25, 2009,
Taipei, Taiwan.
Harik, I. “Haalat saad eddin ibrahim mithalaan ala fassaad maqullat al-
istibdad al-rashid” (Saad Eddin Ibrahim’s case as an example of the
hollowness of the Notion of Guided Despotism). al-Hayat, May 23,
2001: p. 16.
Hopkins, N. Personal communication. March 3, 2009.
Hopkins, N. and S. E. Ibrahim, eds. Arab Society in Transition: A Reader.
Cairo: The American University in Cairo, 1977.
Ibrahim, S. E. “Hard Birth of a New Arab Leadership.” Ibn Khaldun Cen-
ter.
(http://www.eicds.org/english/publications/saadarticles/2004/hardbir
h.htm).
Ibrahim, S. E. “Anatomy of Egypt’s Militant Groups: Methodological
Notes and Preliminary Findings.” International Journal of Middle
East Studies 12(1980).
Ibrahim, S. E. L’aadat al- i’ tibar lil ra’ I al-Sadat (Reconsidering (or)
Reinstating President Sadat). Cairo: Dar al-Shuruq, 1992a.
Ibrahim, S. E. Ta’amulaat fi mas’ alat al-aqualliyyat, (Thoughts about
the Question of Minorities). Cairo: Marquaz Ibn Khaldun, Ibn
Khaldun Center, 1992b.
Ibrahim, S. E. Egypt, Islam and Democracy, Twelve Essays. Cairo: The
American University Press, 1996.
Ibrahim, S. E. “Cross-eyed Sociology in Egypt and the Arab World.”
Contemporary Sociology 26, no. 5 (1997): 547-551.
Ibrahim, S. E. Al-muffakir wal sulta (The Thinker and Power). Cairo: Dar
Qabaa’ lil tibaa’ wal nashr, 2000.
Ibrahim, S. E. “Fiqh al-gumlukiya al-‘arabiya” (In the Interpretation of
the Arab jumlukiyya). al-Hayat, January 20, 2004.
Ibrahim, S. E. “The Memoirs of Saad Edin Ibrahim.” Al-Dustur, February
18, 2009: p. 17.
212 Mona Abaza
Ibrahim, S. E. “Hiwar al-yaum ma’ a mohammed abul ghar wa farida al-

naqqash” (Daily Dialogue with Mohammed Abul Ghar and Farida al-
Naqquash). Al-Masry al-Yaum, February 21, 2009.
Laroui, A. L´idéologie arabe contemporaine. Paris: François Maspero,
1977.
Lesch, A. Personal communication. May 2, 2009.
Morsy, S., C. Nelson, R. Saad and H. Sholkamy. Anthropology and the
Call for Indigenization of Social Sciences in the Arab World, edited
by E.l. Sullivan, J.S Ismail. Alberta: University of Alberta Press,
1991.
Roussillon, A. “Durkheimisme et Réformisme, Fondation identitaire de la
sociologie en Egypte.” Annales, Histoires, Sciences Sociales 6 (1999):
1363-1394.
Saleh, M. “‘an khalfiyyat quadiyyat saad eddin ibrahim” (On the Back-
ground of Saad Eddin Ibrahim’s Case). al-Hayat, June 18, 2001.
Salvatore, A. Islam and the Political Discourse of Modernity. UK: Garnet
Publishing and Ithaca Press, 1991.
Sholkamy, H. “Why is Anthropology So Hard in Egypt?” In Between
Field and Text: Emerging Voices in Egyptian Social Science, edited
by Seteney Shami and Linda Herrera, pp. 119-138. Cairo Papers in
Social Sciences 22, no. 2 (1999).
Weaver, M. A. “A Trial in Mubarak’s Egypt.” The New York Times
Magazine, June 17, 2001. (http://www.nytimes.com).
“Shocked Again.” Cairo Times, December 27-January 2, 2002.
South African Sociology 213
South African Sociology:

Current Challenges and Future Implications:
A Review and Some Empirical Evidence
from the 2007 National Survey of Sociology
Departments
Mokong Simon Mapadimeng, University of Johannesburg,
Johannesburg, South Africa 1
Sociology as a social scientific discipline is not new to debate, especially

among sociologists themselves, and this has also been so in South Africa
(SA). Featuring strongly as key contributors to a debate on South African
sociology are Groenewald (1991), Jubber (1983), Grunding (1994), Sitas
(1996), Crothers (1998), Webster (1985), Webster and Hendricks (2001),
Burawoy (2003 and 2004), and Uys (2004). The central concern in this
debate has been and remains to establish an understanding of the outlook
and role of SA sociology, its state at different historical points, its
historical evolution in SA, and, most importantly, its future role and
position in the post-apartheid globalization period. In the last 13 years of
democratic administration in SA, the debate has increased in intensity,
whereby the latter concern, i.e., the future role and shape that sociology is
taking in SA, has been the main concern. The debate found expression
mainly through the podium provided by the South African Sociological
Association (SASA) and in its journal formerly known as Society in
Transition (now renamed South African Review of Sociology), in which
keynote addresses on this topic where published. Still other publications
of the debate occurred through the journals of the International
Sociological Association (ISA), to which SASA is an affiliate, and
especially in its journal Current Sociology.
In this article, I provide a review of this debate in a way that
synthesizes key views held on SA sociology. This is done with the view
1
Mokong Simon Mapadimeng is a Research Associate at the Centre for
Sociological Research, University of Johannesburg, South Africa. He is also a
member of the National Arts Council of South Africa and the President of the
South African Sociological Association.
214 Mokong Simon Mapadimeng
to deciphering from the debate the current state of SA sociology, its role
and challenges, as well as its future prospects as a discipline. In doing so,
attention will also be paid to the outcomes of the recently conducted
national survey of the sociology departments in SA, whereby issues such
as staff profiles, student numbers, student: lecturer ratios, and research
activities were investigated. The survey was conducted by SASA with
financial support from the National Research foundation (NRF). The
article starts with a review of the debate and an examination of the
empirical survey data and then proceeds to outline observations made
from the review. On the basis of these, some concluding remarks are
then made on the role, challenges, and future prospects of sociology in
the post-apartheid, democratic South Africa.
A REVIEW OF THE DEBATE ON SOUTH

AFRICAN SOCIOLOGY
The debate on SA sociology takes into account the history of sociology as

a discipline and field of study and practice, whereby it is traced to as far
back as the early twentieth century. As Webster (2004; 2007) and
Burawoy (2004) point out, during this period, sociology formed part of
social work programs, with its main preoccupation being its contribution
to social administration and social policy. Its main concern was client-
welfare agencies and government (Webster 2004; 2007). In the later
period of the 1950s and 1960s, the discipline underwent changes, as some
of the leading sociologists, notably Professor Cilliers of the University of
Stellenbosch, sought to professionalize the discipline and give it a sense
of autonomy from social work through the injection of the Parsonian
functionalist theoretical framework (Burawoy 2003; Webster 2004; Uys
2004). The result was a break away from social work, giving rise to an
independent growth of the discipline of sociology in SA. What was
promising to become an independent, vibrant discipline, however, came
to be bedeviled by racial and ethnic divisions under the apartheid regime,
very much in line with the racially-based separate development
government policies that sought to promote and uphold white racial
supremacy. This saw sociology growing as a divided discipline in
different universities, taking different directions in terms of its role and
interventions in the society. In the English-speaking universities,
Webster (2004) speaks of what he refers to as the emergence of
“oppositional sociology,” opposed to apartheid, while in Afrikaans-
speaking universities it was labeled “Afrikaner sociology,” serving the
apartheid system. In black universities, sociology was only introduced in
the 1960s, developing a strong Marxist thrust against apartheid (Webster

2004: 28-29).
Racial divisions within sociology in SA also manifested themselves
at the organizational level when the South African Sociological
Association (SASOV) was created as exclusively white sociological body
for largely Afrikaans-speaking universities, only later to be challenged
through the establishment of much more liberal, non-racial counter body
in the form of the Association of Sociology in Southern Africa (ASSA).
While SASOV was uncritical of the apartheid system, ASSA openly
struggled against and condemned the system (Uys 2004; Webster 2004).
The two associations were later merged to form the present-day South
African Sociological Association (SASA) in 1993, in order to
appropriately locate the community of sociologists in the post-apartheid
democratic SA and ensure that it plays a constructive role for the
advancement of the democratic system.
In the late 1970s, sociology had, according to Webster (2004),
developed into a critical, vibrant discipline, with New Left intellectual
influences which began, through the ASSA congresses, to engage
critically with the SA society’s problems, like racial inequalities and
racial domination. This was followed in the 1980s by sociologists’
engagement with these issues through “dialogue with social movements
struggling against apartheid” (Webster 2004: 30).
This historical evolution of sociology in SA up to the 1990s, Webster
argues, in agreement with Burawoy (2004), is consistent with and is best
explained by the latter’s model (see table 1 below) which he developed to
make sense of the sociology as a discipline worldwide.
Table.1. Burawoy’s Model: The Discipline of Sociology
Extra-Academic
Academic Audience
Audience
Instrumental
Professional Sociology Policy Sociology
Knowledge
Reflexive
Critical Sociology Public Sociology
Knowledge
Based on the above model, different sociologies are said to have

characterized and dominated in different historical periods of the
evolution of the discipline in SA. These are described as professional,
policy, public, and critical sociology. Professional sociology is,
according to Burawoy (2004), practiced mainly in universities with the

aim of generating “abstract knowledge, seeking scientific legitimacy,
accountable to a community of peers,” while policy sociology is
concerned “with concrete knowledge, legitimated by its effectiveness,
and accountable to a client …” (19). This, he argues, is in contrast with
critical sociology, as the latter “rests on foundational knowledge, rooted
in moral vision accountable to a community of intellectuals.” Public
sociology, on the other hand, is considered by Burawoy to be dialogic
and “relevant to the public to which it is answerable” (19). Beyond these
differences, Burawoy sees all the four typologies as dependent on each
other, and this is best reflected in his argument quoted below:
Critical sociology is the conscience of professional sociology,

uncovering the assumptions and values upon which it rests and by so
doing always suggesting alternative foundations. Critical sociology
discloses the connection between sociology and the world it studies,
demystifying claims to pure science, demonstrating the futility of a
completely self-referential system of knowledge. With its interest in
values, critical sociology lays the basis for public sociology’s
engagement with the audiences beyond the academy. However, critical
sociology is first and foremost an academic sociology, nurtured by a
community of intellectuals that might span several disciplines, whose
raison d’être derives from an ingrown professional sociology (17).
These sociologies, Burawoy argues, are relevant to different

categories of audiences, i.e., academic and extra-academic audiences, and
they lead to the production of different knowledges, i.e., instrumental
knowledge, which is concerned mainly with orientations of means to
specified ends, and reflexive knowledge, which promotes discussion of
those ends and values (18).
The debate on sociology not only provides insights into the historical
evolution of the discipline in SA but also helps in understanding two
other vital aspects pertaining to sociology in SA, i.e., the definition of the
nature of the discipline and the challenges facing it in the present period.
As far as the former aspect is concerned, Burawoy’s model and
contributions from SA sociologists help in clearly defining sociology and
its role. In her defense of sociology as a discipline, especially in the light
of propositions such as Immanuel Wallerstein’s (1998) that efforts should
go into promoting the culture of social sciences as opposed to discipline-
specific cultures such as sociology, Tina Uys (2004) identifies defining
features that distinguish sociology from other disciplines. In doing so,
she makes reference to Goran Therbon’s (2000) “three spaces of
identity,” i.e., a space of discipline, of everyday practice, and of

imagination and investigation. What makes sociology distinct, Uys
argues, is “its sociological imagination, it emphasis on unmasking
deceptions and illusions, and its commitment to improving the world we
live in,” and furthermore that it “has always been associated with social
intervention and social action” (9). This understanding of sociology and
its role both reinforces Burawoy’s models, according to which the four
types of sociologies are mutually dependent on each other, and points to a
general consensus on the understanding of the role and nature of
sociology. For instance, the late Chachage (2004), in his assessment of
the future of sociology in Africa, argues for the need to rethink the object
of sociological study beyond a rather ambiguous view that sociology is
simply concerned with the study of society. For Chachage, sociology
should continue on its rich tradition of being primarily concerned with
seeking to generate a body of knowledge around contemporary and
relevant social problems and social movements which have always been
critical to the stimulation of the sociological imagination. This is clearly
captured in his argument pertaining to African sociology, as quoted
below:
Given the problems facing Africa – civil strife, ethnicity, racism,

corruption, terrorist governments … unemployment, land and natural
resource disputes, famine, economic hardships, etc., it is about time
sociology in Africa rethought the whole question of the state
(administrative power) and its relation to the civil society; military
power and war; democracy and democratic forms; gender, nation, race
and ethnic relations, and many others (60).
Hence, in his view, “Our sociological knowledge will have to reflect the
social conditions of struggles through which men and women
simultaneously transform their circumstances and themselves” (60).
Challenges facing sociology in SA today and in the future are, as can
be deduced from the debate in SA, varied and complex. Among these
challenges are those of an institutional nature. Webster (2004) noted that
there has been a significant change in the institutional landscape and
context in which sociology is practiced in SA, as a result of the over-
emphasis on the need for SA to become globally competitive. Notable
institutional changes include: 1) the strengthening of policy research
through transformation of and increased support for the Human Sciences
Research Council (HSRC) which conducts policy research; 2) the
creation of the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) with the
main aim of developing a vocationally-oriented educational system; 3)
the creation of the National Research Foundation (NRF) for a single

science-funding system as well as to promote interdisciplinarity; 4) and
the trend towards commercialization and/or corporatization of
universities whereby the emphasis is on producing graduates with
marketable skills, thus seeing students as clients (Uys 2004; Webster
2004). While these present opportunities, according to Uys and Webster,
they also pose some serious threats, which could see a move away from
public sociology towards more professional sociology, whose emphasis is
on publishing in professional journals. These changes impose pressures
that could see a balance between different sociologies and their
complementary roles being distorted and lost. They also could have a
negative impact in terms of inhibiting creativity and innovations in
sociology.
Other challenges and constraints facing sociology in SA that could
further exacerbate the negative consequences on the discipline’s growth
and development were unearthed through the survey conducted in 2003
in 15 South African universities. Uys (2004) noted from this survey a
number of challenges to the discipline ranging from race (white
dominance) and gender (male dominance) imbalances in terms of levels
of seniority and numbers to inequalities between the historically black
and white universities in terms of research activities and publications
output. Uys also found other constraints to innovative and creative
sociology, such as heavy teaching loads and greater reliance on text
books produced in the West, as well as low teaching staff: student ratios
of 1:71 (7). During the time of the survey, only 7,400 students were
registered for sociology, with only a few for the postgraduate studies, i.e.,
107 for honors, 222 for master’s degrees, and 79 for doctoral degrees (7).
Notwithstanding these constraints and challenges, Uys (2005) ended with
optimism, arguing that SA sociology is responding creatively to the local
challenges and problems and hence is ideally suited “to make reasoned
judgments and engage in actions aimed at promoting the well-being of
human beings,” while not abandoning analytical knowledge (episteme)
and technical know-how (techne) (9). Basically, here, Uys refers to the
ability of SA sociology, despite the challenges it is confronted with, to
still strike a balance between Burawoy’s four sociologies. Part of the
reason for Uys’s optimism is what she finds to be a positive trend
amongst the SA sociologists marked by a move beyond past tendencies to
choose either quantitative or qualitative methods, towards adopting an
integrated multi-strategy approach that combines different methodologies.
However, the findings of the recent 2007 survey of SA sociology
departments conducted with the SASA’s mandate by its recent past
president, Johan Zaimaan, with the financial support of the NRF, presents
a picture that both supports and challenges this optimistic assertion by

Uys. The findings show a significant improvement in students enrolled
for sociology courses. The 7,400 number of the 2003/4 academic year
more than tripled to 22,968 registered undergraduates and 1,364
registered postgraduates in the 2007/2008 academic year. Of the 1,364
registered at postgraduate level, 656 are for honors degree (which has
tripled); 557 for master’s degree (which has doubled) and 133 for PhD
degree (which has almost doubled). While this augurs well for the future
capacity within sociology, although not all undergraduates will
necessarily proceed with the major in sociology or even to the
postgraduate level, there is a downside. Staff: student ratios are still
unimpressive. The recent survey found that throughout the country,
universities have a total of 170 full-time staff members and 11 part-time
staff members working out to a staff: student ratio of 1:143.
This implies low capacity for both teaching and supervision or
coaching, especially in view of the increased number of postgraduate
students. As open interviews with staff in various universities revealed,
staff are heavily loaded with teaching and supervision, leading to a
compromise not only in quality in teaching and supervision, but also and
importantly imposing constraints on ability and time to conduct research
and publish. The implications are negative for development of a strong
professional sociology needed for effective critical, public, and policy
sociologies. This may explain the survey’s findings that staff complained
about the low quality of students and that, in the context of heavy
teaching loads and poor salaries, it is becoming increasingly difficult to
retain staff, especially black academic staff who are in huge demand both
in the private and government sectors, which happen to pay at market
rates and offer attractive fringe benefits. The point about the quality of
students is consistent with the assertion once made by Tom Lodge (1999),
a prominent political scientist, that the new generation of students are not
interested in ideas but only in certificates as passports to employment.
The above scenario is even graver within the historically black
universities (HBUs). Although staff: student ratios in both the HBUs and
the historically white universities (HWUs) are more or less similar and
are therefore almost equally overloaded with teaching, the difference lies
in the fact that while most of the HBUs have no more than four staff
members, most of the HWUs have at least 13 staff members each. This
implies that within the HWUs, there is a relatively larger community of
scholars creating a vibrant, dynamic, and competitive intellectual
environment with numerous intellectually challenging and exciting
activities, such as seminar series in which staff and senior students are
able to present and discuss their ongoing research. This helps to cushion
the impact of heavy teaching loads and constraints imposed on reach

productivity. This point was noted in previous research such as that by
Webster and Mosoetsa (2001: 73). Another plus for the HWUs but
missing in the HBUs is that amongst the former’s staff, there are several
senior/full professors and scholars who provide intellectual and academic
leadership as chairs and heads of disciplines. This is generally missing
within the HBUs, where more often than not, academic leadership is left
in the hands of staff in the middle levels of their careers, i.e., either
without doctorates or currently registered for doctorates, and with lower
scholarly standing and poor publishing records. The result is the
overstretching of those in these levels within the HBUs, creating further
strain on getting them to complete their doctoral degrees and get into
becoming productive in terms of research and publishing.
This set of people, which is referred to as the “missing middle,”
characterized by higher loss of staff at this level, is indeed bound to
continue for a long time to come, as predicted by Alexander and Makhura
(2006). The implications for the development of sociology, not only to
ensure that racial equity is achieved but also that diversity of sociological
perspectives, viewpoints, and voices that reflect the socially and
culturally diverse nature of the SA society are heard in knowledge
development endeavours, are serious and negative. Also likely to
continue to be inadequately represented within the sociological writings
in SA are works on the issues affecting the rural sector by scholars based
in rural areas, and how this sector links with urban sector issues and
complexities. This is especially so because most of the HBUs are
situated in the former homelands and Bantustans, and we know by now
that within these universities, the research output has always been low.
Furthermore, the above implies that the contribution to knowledge
development by sociologists will continue to be dominated by white
scholars, reinforcing the fear expressed by Alexander and Makhura that,
in the light of evidence that shows insignificant improvement of
publications by black sociologists in the last decade and a half, we still
have a long way to go in terms of addressing racial imbalances. Even
more serious is that the current situation, marked by over-dependence on
outside sociology textbooks and other reading materials (mainly from
Western countries), is likely to continue. The current low research
productivity, especially in the HBUs and among black sociologists, could
be worsened by the poor conditions of service under which they are
working as well as low remunerations. Already, researchers have seen
university-based sociologies, pressured by institutional and financial
factors (e.g., corporatisation of higher education, reduced funding, and
de-motivating rating systems), opting to spend more time on
commissioned policy-type research that is funded and owned by the state

and the private sector, dealing a heavy blow to production of scholarly
research meant to advance sociological knowledge needed for
development of other sociologies, i.e., public, policy, and critical.
CONCLUSION
It is clear from the review above that the future of sociology rests on
ensuring a healthy balance between the four types of sociologies with
their different audiences, to make them mutually enriching and
reinforcing. It is, however, even more clear that for both public and
policy sociology to be strengthened and made meaningful, they require
strong university-based sociologies, i.e., professional and critical
sociologies. I argue here that while sociology in South Africa in the past
was marked by divisions, mainly racial and ideological, as well as
fragmentation with various historical eras characterized by the
domination of certain sociologies, the situation in the post-apartheid
period is much more complex. This complexity suggests that there are
both opportunities to strike a balance in the development of different but
complementary sociologies as categorized by Burawoy (hence, Uys’s
optimism that Chachage’s vision of the role of sociology in Africa is
possible) and challenges and/or constraints that could stifle the
achievement of this balance, possibly resulting in continued historical
divisions and weaknesses.
Opportunities suggesting great prospects for SA sociology can be
seen from the increase in the numbers of students, which could result in
improvement in the numbers of sociologists to boost the current situation
of only 170 full time employed sociologists in the academic sector.
While the increased number of students could be seen as a sign of
optimism, it is, however, off-set by the current low number of academic
staff/sociologists, implying heavy teaching and supervision loads, with a
subsequent negative impact on the quality of teaching and training. Other
points of concern include the disparities between the HWUs and the
HBUs. The former boast large communities of sociologists with a good
number of senior scholars providing the highly needed academic
leadership and inspiration to those at entry level in the discipline as well
as those in the middle of their careers within the discipline. On the
contrary, the latter (HBUs) are seriously lacking in this regard. The
implications, as I have mentioned already, are negative for not only the
strong development of sociology in the HBUs but also in the entire
country, especially from the point of view of knowledge development
that adequately reflects the diverse nature of the SA society and has
relevance to a wide range of complex realities and problems facing the
country. This scenario is likely to perpetuate the racial divisions and
inequalities within SA sociology as inherited from the past. This implies
that the SA sociology is unlikely to respond creatively and innovatively
to and engage critically with what Alexander and Makhura (2006) call
“the post-modern agenda,” drawing from Patel’s view of globalization as
creating the need for “The possibility, of reconnecting fields of
knowledge: joining political economy and culture, far away places and
hidden social forces with local problems and new identities, and structure
with agency and possibilities for social change” (as quoted in Alexander
and Makhura 2006: 19).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alexander, P. and P. Makhura. “Sociology Research in Contemporary

South Africa.” Paper presented at the South African Sociological
Association (SASA)/National Research foundation (NRF) Workshop,
Johannesburg, 2006.
Burawoy, M. “Public Sociology: South African Dilemmas in a Global
Context.” Society in Transition 35, no. 1 (2003).
Chachage, C.L.S. “Higher Education Transformation and Academic
Exterminism.” Globalization and Social Policy in Africa. African
Books Collective, 2004.
Crothers, C. “Sociology and Social Research in South Africa.” In
Gathering Voices: Perspectives in the Social Sciences in Southern
Africa, edited by T. Silva and A. Sitas. Madrid: International
Sociological Association, 1998.
Groenewald, C. “The Context of the Development of Sociology in
Southern Africa: A Reply to Visser and Van Styaden.” South African
Journal of Sociology 22, no. 2 (1991).
Grunding, A. “Structures for Sociologists: A Historical Perspective on
the Association for Sociologists in South Africa (1967-1991).” In
Social Theory, edited by N. Romm and M. Sarakinsky. Johannesburg:
Lexicon, 1994.
Jubber, K. “Sociology and its Sociological Context: The Case of the Rise
of Marxist Sociology in South Africa.” Social Dynamics 9 (1983).
Lodge, Tom. Daily News, April 16, 1999.
Sitas, A. “The Waning of Sociology in South Africa.” Society in
Transition 28 (1996).
-----. “The African Renaissance Challenge and Sociological

Reclamations in the South.” Current Sociology 54, no. 3 (2006).
Therbon, Goran. “At the Birth of Second Century Sociology: Times of
Reflexivity, Spaces of Identity, and Nodes of Knowledge.” British
Journal of Sociology 51, no. 1 (2000): 37-57.
Uys, T. “In Defense of South African Sociology.” Society in Transition
35, no. 1 (2004).
Wallerstein, Immanuel. “The Time of Space and the Space of Time: The
Future of Social Science.” Political Geography 17, no. 1 (January
1998): 71-82.
Webster, E. “Competing Paradigms: Towards a Critical Sociology in
Southern Africa.” Social Dynamics 11, no. 1 (1985).
-----. “Sociology in South Africa: Its Past, Present and Future.” Society
in Transition 35, no. 1 (2004): 27-41.
----- and F. Hendricks. Transforming the Discipline: The State of
Sociology in South Africa. Pretoria: National Research Foundation,
2001.
224 Tina Uys
Resistance to Rating: Resource Allocation,

Academic Freedom and Citizenship
Tina Uys, University of Johannesburg, South Africa
Since the early eighties universities worldwide have been confronted with
the need to adapt to the pressures of marketisation. They have become
‘knowledge factories.’ The traditional role of the university (as espoused
in the middle ages) as ‘the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake’ has
been replaced by the ‘pursuit of useful knowledge’ (David 1997: 4). This
pursuit is characterised by the fact that scientific research is often
transformed into technology, due to the demands of externally
determined research agendas (Wasser 1990: 112).
Marketisation is not the only factor which impacts negatively on the
academic’s time for reflection and ‘…the freedom to pursue research and
excellence in conditions of security’ (Miller 1991: 124). Under the guise
of the demands of globalisation, governments are placing pressure on
universities to make a contribution to increased international
competitiveness. This represents a strengthening of links between the
university and industry (Kaplan 1997: 69). Thus, knowledge is used for
commercial purposes and the focus is on short-term, applied research
aimed at developing marketable products (Orr 1997: 47).
Research is increasingly undertaken in order to make a profit, which
leads to a greater emphasis on knowledge as private property and the pro-
tection of intellectual property rights. Free and open dissemination of
knowledge is a thing of the past in the market university. The traditional
unity of research, teaching and study or scholarship is increasingly being
eroded with the development of more and more teaching-only or re-
search-only institutions (Orr 1997: 50-59). Wasser (1990: 121) argues
that the university is evolving from the traditional into the entrepreneurial;
governments favour research that has an economic benefit along with
vocationally orientated courses.
The development of the entrepreneurial university is often referred to
as “academic capitalism.” Ylijoki (2003: 308) defines it as consisting of
“both direct market activity, which seeks for profit, such as patents, li-
cences and spin-off firms, and of market-like behaviour, which entails
competition of external funding without the intention to make a profit,
such as grants, research contracts and donations. In both senses academic
Resistance to Rating 225
capitalism promotes market-orientation and competition in university

research.”
In South Africa higher education is experiencing what Webster and
Adler (1999) call “a double transition.” A new curriculum (Curriculum
2005 or so-called outcomes-based education), and the South African
Qualifications Authority was introduced , which were supposed to in-
crease the mobility of students between campuses, promote transforma-
tion, reduce or eradicate duplication and ensure the ‘delivery’ of gradu-
ates with marketable skills who would be productive members of society.
This was to be achieved by the development of so-called programmes
focused on equipping students with the necessary skills to operate suc-
cessfully within a particular work context. At the same time “the restruc-
turing of the higher education landscape” (Jansen 2003: 304) took place.
This entailed the merging of universities and technikons (the South Afri-
can term for technical colleges which provide post-school vocational
training) in order to achieve the supposed ideal number of 21 institutions
of higher learning.
All of these sorts of transformation initiatives are undertaken at the
behest of the Minister in charge of the Department of Education. The
Higher Education Act of 1997, and subsequent amendments, has empow-
ered the Minister in significant ways. Not only is institutional autonomy
on the decrease, but state interference has increased. For example, the
Minister has to approve loans for sound and financially unsound universi-
ties. In this way, financial flows are controlled by the State, and not by
the institution in question. Moreover, the Department of Education claims
that mergers took place so as to help economically inefficient higher edu-
cation institutions to become less so when joined with more efficient in-
stitutions. However, it is clear that the mergers were politically efficient,
in terms of an attempt to regulate equity imbalances, as opposed to the
bottom line. In this way, the state’s transformation agenda has been po-
litically, rather than economically driven (Moja, Cloete and Olivier 2002:
36-46).
Considering the above, role-players in South Africa have to deal with
a double-edged sword, wherein global economic pressures and local po-
litical concerns intersect. On the one hand, they need to transform univer-
sities to address the legacies of the past, and on the other they need to
consider the role of the university as producers of ‘useful knowledge.’
This represents a juggling act whereby universities enrol more students
from previously disadvantaged communities, transform councils, senates
and academic staff to reflect the demographic realities of South Africa,
participate actively in community upliftment, but also, due to increased
financial constraints, need to consider their own viability. This viability is
226 Tina Uys
addressed in terms of attracting state funding but also private sector dona-
tions, which, in turn, can compromise the ‘independence’ of the univer-
sity under consideration.
The rapidly changing socio-historical context has also made an im-
pact on the way in which state funding for research is structured and
managed. Academic freedom in research is no longer simply the freedom
of academics “to speak their own minds, to teach in accordance with their
own interests, and to develop those interests according to their own re-
search agenda” (Nixon 2001: 175). It has become entwined with ac-
countability and international competitiveness. This paper explores the
system of evaluation and rating introduced by the South African National
Research Foundation for researchers in the social sciences and humanities
in 2002. In particular, the resistance amongst sociologists in terms of the
impact of the system on resource allocation, collegiality and the freedom
of sociologists to determine their own research agendas is considered. In
so doing, attention will be paid to the ways in which state resource
allocation and transformation agendas impact perceptions of academic
freedom, and how it is being navigated.
THE HISTORY OF STATE FUNDING FOR RESEARCH IN

SOUTH AFRICA
Support for research in universities in South Africa has a long history

dating from 1942 when General Jan Smuts, initiated the idea of
establishing a national research body in South Africa. As a result the
Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) was founded in
1945 through an Act of Parliament. An important item on the agenda of
the first council meeting was the promotion of research in universities
through grants and bursaries (NRF 2005: 3).
In the early 1980s a concern developed among researchers at
universities with regard to the absence of clearly defined and generally
accepted criteria for the allocation of funds. After an investigation the
CSIR Foundation for Research Development (FRD) was formed in 1984,
tasked with the awarding of research grants and bursaries to applicants in
the natural sciences. The FRD became an independent body in 1990
(NRF 2005: 3).
Until the late nineties the social sciences and the natural sciences in
South Africa operated in totally separate enclaves as far as research in the
higher education sector was concerned. While funding and research
support for the natural sciences was administered through the FRD, the
social sciences received their funding and research support through the
Centre for Science Development (CSD), a division of the Human

Sciences Research Council (HSRC). In both cases support entailed
grants for conducting research as well as bursaries for students. The FRD
also made funding available for equipment and research infrastructure.
From 1982 the FRD developed an evaluation and rating system for
natural scientists which was implemented for the first time in 1984. This
rating system made the following distinctions: A-rated scientists
(Leading international researchers), B-rated scientists (Internationally
acclaimed researchers), C-rated scientists (Established researchers) and Y
ratings (Promising young researchers).
The National Research Foundation was established in 1999 through
the National Research Foundation Act, Act 23 of 1998. The new
organisation entailed the amalgamation of the FRD and the CSD into a
new funding body charged with the promotion of and support for research
across all fields of the humanities, social and natural sciences,
engineering and technology. Significantly this new agency was based at
the CSIR, the previous home of the FRD.
From 2002 the NRF extended the evaluation and rating system
previously in place for the natural sciences to the social sciences and
humanities. This paper describes the review process and considers the
strengths and weaknesses of such a system of individual evaluation and
rating for the social sciences in general and for sociology in particular.
THE AIM OF THE EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM
The main aim of the evaluation and rating system is to provide an

objective determination of the quality of the research output of individual
researchers in higher education based on their recent track record and
outputs in research by means of peer evaluation. The definition of
research used for by the NRF for this purpose is reflected in Table 1.
The following criteria are used to perform the peer evaluation:
• The quality of the research outputs of the preceding eight years

• The impact of the applicant’s work in his/her field and how it has
impacted on adjacent fields.
• An assessment of the candidate standing as a researcher in the field in
terms of a South African as well as an international perspective.
In order for the peer evaluation to be conducted the candidate needs to

submit a research portfolio listing research outputs in particular books of
scholarship, chapters in scholarly books, peer-reviewed journal articles
228 Tina Uys
and research-based publications such as refereed conference publications

and edited books. Other evidence of research proficiency such as book
reviews, editorship of journals, official positions in professional
associations, and the impact of higher degree supervision on a reseach
programme, visiting professorships, staff development and research-
based improvements of the quality of higher education are also
considered. Apart from keynote or plenary addresses conference papers
seem not to carry much weight in the peer review process.
Table 1 Definition of research
For purposes of the NRF, research is original investigation undertaken to gain

knowledge and/or enhance understanding.
Research specifically includes:

• The creation and development of the intellectual infrastructure of sub-
jects and disciplines (e.g.) through dictionaries, scholarly editions,
catalogues and contributions to major research databases);
• The invention or generation of ideas, images, performances and arte-
facts where these manifestly embody new or substantially developed
insights;
• Building on existing knowledge to produce new or substantially im-
proved materials, devices, products, policies or processes.
It specifically excludes:
• routine testing and analysis of materials, components, instruments and
processes, as distinct from the development of new analytical tech-
niques.
• the development of teaching materials and teaching practices that do
not embody substantial original enquiry.
Source: National Research Foundation (2005: 8).
It is clear from the above that the evaluation and rating system
focuses nearly exclusively on the promotion of professional sociology as
defined by Michael Burawoy (2004). It is also an individualistic system
that rates single authorship ouput more highly than collaborative efforts.
As a special incentive to apply for rating researchers who have received a
rating are allowed to apply for five-year funding for a project from the
NRF’s Focused Areas programme as opposed to the two years for non-
rated researchers. Once the programme of rating has been running for a
few years non-rated researchers will not be allowed to apply for research
money from the NRF as a project leader at all.
THE PROCEDURE OF EVALUATION AND RATING
Applications for evaluation and rating are open to all full-time, part-time
or contract researchers based at South African higher education
institutions (HELs), museums or any other NRF recognised research
institution. An NRF recognised research institution is one
• that conducts basic research or applied research,

• of a pre-competitive nature,
• promoting the long-term knowledge base,
• within the declared NRF focus areas.
• It should have a research training component leading to master’s
degrees and doctorates, while being committed to equity and redress.
The research portfolio must be submitted via the research office of the
institution that the applicant is based at and needs to be supported by the
research office. After screening by the Evaluation Centre acceptable
applications are sent through to the appropriate specialist committee for
the appointment of peer reviewers.
There are presently 21 such specialist committees of which 11 are for
the social sciences and humanities. The eleven specialist committees for
the social sciences and humanities are the following:
• Anthroplogy, Development Studies, Geography, Sociology and Social

Work
• Communication, Media Studies and Library and Information Sciences
• Economics, Management, Administration and Accounting
• Education
• Historical Studies
• Law
• Literary Studies, Languages and Linguistics
• Performing and Creative Arts, and Design
• Political Sciences, Policy Studies and Philosophy
• Psychology
• Religious Studies and Theology
Each of these committees consists of three to six respected members of

the South African research community in each of the fields of research.
As is clear from the above sociology is grouped together in one
specialist committee with anthropology, development studies, geography
and social work. It is interesting to note that this specialist committee
includes the widest array of disciplines of all the social science and
230 Tina Uys
humanities committees. Education, historical studies, law, psychology

and religious studies each have their own separate specialist committee.
The specialist committee appoints the peer reviewers, evaluates their
reports and allocate a rating. At least six reviewers are appointed of
which at least half are from prestigious institutions abroad. Reviewers
are not informed about the previous evaluation or rating of applicants, or
about the rating categories that are used by the NRF. Provision is made
for an appeals process.
Three categories of ratings are used. The first category deals with
researchers who have established themselves in their field. The following
distinctions are made:
• A – Leading international researcher: judged world leaders in their

field
• B – Internationally acclaimed researcher: has considerable international
recognition as an independent researcher
• C – Establised researcher: demonstrates a solid body of research which
reflects an ongoing commitment in their field
The second category distinguishes between two kinds of ratings that are
awarded to young researchers, normally younger than 35 years with a
doctoral qualification of less than 5 years.
• P – NRF President’s Awardee: are recognised internationally as having

the potential to become leaders in their field in the future.
• Y– Promising young researcher: showing the potential to become
established reseachers within a five-year period after evaluation.
Provision is also made for those researchers, normally younger than 55

years who have shown promise or ability as researchers in the past but
have been prevented from developing this ability because of the absence
of a research environment, time spent in industry or family
responsibilities.
Finer distinctions are also made in the rating in terms of A1, A2, B1,
B2, B3, C1, C2, C3, Y1 and Y2. A more detailed explanation of the
ratings that can be awarded is reflected in Table 2.
Table 2: Definitions of rating categories and research
Sub-
Category Definition Description
category
A Researchers who are A1 A researcher in this group
unequivocally is recognised by all
recognised but heir reviewers as a leading
peers as leading scholar in his/her field
international scholars in internationally for the high
their field for the high quality and wide impact
quality and impact of (i.e.) beyond a narrow field
their recent research of specialisation) of his/her
outputs. recent research outputs.
A2 A researcher in this group

is recognised by the
overriding majority of
reviewes as a leading scholar
in his/her field
internationally for the high
quality and impact (either
wide of confined) of his/her
recent research outputs.
B Researchers who enjoy B1 All reviewers concur that
considerable the applicant enjoys
international considerable international
recognition by their recognition for the high
peers for the high quality and impact of his/her
quality and impact of recent research outputs, with
their recent research some of them indicating that
outputs. he/she is a leading
international scholar in the
field.
B2 All or the overriding

majority of reviewers are
firmly convinced that the
applicant enjoys
considerable international
recognition for the high
quality and impact of his/her
recent research outputs.
232 Tina Uys
Sub-
category
B3 Most of the reviewers are
convinced that the applicant
enjoys considerable
international recognition for
the high quality and impact
of his/her recent research
outputs.
C Established researchers C1 While all reviewers concur
with a sustained recent that the applicant is an
record of productibity in established researcher (as
the field who are described), some of them
recognised by their indicate that he/she already
peers as having: enjoys considerable
international regonition for
Produced a body of his/her high quality recent
quality work, the core research outputs.
of which has coherence
and attests to ongoing C2 All or the overriding
engagement with the majority of reviewers are
field firmly convinced that the
Demonstrated the applicant is an established
ability to conceptualise researcher (as described).
problems and apply
research methods to C3 Most of the reviewers
investigating them concur that the applicant is
an established researcher (as
described).
Sub-
category
P Young researchers Researchers in this group
(normally younger than are recognised by all or the
35 years of age), who over-riding majority of
have held the doctorate reviewers as having
of equivalent demonstrated the potential
qualification for less of becoming future leaders
than five years at the in their field, on the basis of
time of application and exeptional research
who, on the basis of performance and output
exceptional potential from their doctoral and/or
Sub-
category
demonstrated in their early post-doctoral research
published doctoral work careers.
and/or their research
outputs in their early
post-doctoral careers are
considered likely to
become future leaders in
their field.
Y Young researchers Y1 A researcher in this group is
(normally younger than recognised by all reviewers
35 years of age), who as having the potential
have held the doctorate (demonstrated byresearch
of equivalent products) to establish
qualification for less him/herself as a researcher
than five years at the with some of them
time of application, and indicating that he/she has
who are recognised as the potential to become a
having the potential to future leader in his/her
establish themselves as field. (Applicants on the
researchers within a borderline between P and Y
five-year period after should be rated at this
evaluation, based on level.)
their performance and Y2 A researcher in this group is
productivity as recognised by all or the
researchers during their over-riding majority of
doctoral studies and/or reviewers as having the
early post-doctoral potential to establish
careers. him/herslef as a researcher
(demonstrated by recent
research products).
L Persons (normally This category was
younger than 55 years) introduced to draw an
who were previously increased number of
established as researchers with potential
researchers of who from disadvantaged
previously demonstrated backgrounds as well as
potential through their women into research. It
own research products, also caters for persons
and who are considered previously established as
capable of fully researchers who have
234 Tina Uys
Sub-
category
establishing or re- returned to a research
establishing themselves environment after periods
as researchers within a in industry or elswehere.
five-year period after Applicants must
evaluation. Candidates demonstrate that they could
should be South African not realise the potential or
citizens or foreign sustain their research ability
nationals who have been by virtue of a lack of a
resident in South Africa research environment, or
for five years during time spent in industry, or on
which time they have maternity leave, or raising a
been unable for practical family. For candidates to
reasons to realise their qualify for this category the
potential as researchers. employing institution must
have demonstrated its
Candidates who are financial commitment
eligible in this category towards a development
include: strategy for the staff
member concerned
• black
researchers
• female
researchers
• those employed
in a higher
education
institution that
lacked a
research
environment
• those who were
previously
established as
researchers and
have returned
to a research
environment.
Source: National Research Foundation (2005: 7-8).
After the initial rating have been awarded researchers at recognised

research institutions who have been rated A, B, C, P, Y or L are invited to
submit documents for re-evaluation in approximately five-year cyles.
Should a researcher choose not to respond to this invitation, his/her
rating will lapse and will affect funding cycles. Applicants who have not
been awarded a rating have to wait three years before they may apply for
re-evaluation. They may apply for special re-evaluation sooner if the
relevant authority of the employing institution believes that the applicant
has made sufficient progress since the precious rating that it warrants re-
evaluation. A new application then has to be sent to the NRF other with a
motivation indicating why a special re-evaluation is justified.
THE RESPONSE FROM

THE SOCIAL SCIENCE COMMUNITY
The number of applications for rating received by the specialist

committees for the social sciences and humanities as well as their success
rate at receiving a rating are reflected in Table 3 below. It is clear that the
rating system was not received with great enthusiasm by the social
science community. Furthermore, if anything, the slight inital enthusiasm
dwindled rapidly from 380 applications in 2002 to 113 in 2003, 81 in
2004, 100 in 2005 and 82 in 2006. In 2007 only 274 applications were
received which includes applications for re-evaluations for those who
applied for the first time in 2002. The average success rate over the five
year period is 68% and 64% of ratings awarded are as Established
researchers (C). In 2006 only 513 (32%) of the 1606 rated researchers
were from the social sciences and humanities (NRF 2007: 7).
Table 3: Applications and ratings 2002-2006 in social sciences and humanities
Success % Ratings received

Year Applications
A B C P Y L
2002 380 269 71 6 59 175 5 16 8
2003 113 81 72 1 17 52 1 7 3
2004 81 43 53 2 9 26 0 2 4
2005 100 72 72 1 7 43 3 11 7
2006 82 48 59 4 0 31 0 7 6
Total 756 513 68 14 92 327 9 43 28
Source: National Research Foundation (2007: 5-7).
236 Tina Uys
It is also of interest to consider the spread of rated researchers across

specialist committees in the social sciences and humanities as is reflected
in Table 4.
Table 4: The spread of rated researchers in the social sciences and humanities -
2006
Specialist committee – the social sciences and Rating

humanities
A B C Total
Anthropology, Development Studies, 2 9 37 48
Geography, Sociology and Social Work
Communication, Media Studies & Library and 0 2 15 17
Information Sciences
Economics, Management, Administration and 0 7 46 53
Accounting
Education 1 6 38 45
Historical Studies 2 12 19 33
Law 2 15 57 74
Literary studies, Language and Linguistics 5 21 58 84
Performing and Creative Arts and Design 0 10 16 26
Political Studies, Policy Studies and Philosophy 0 7 18 25
Psychology 0 6 28 34
Religious Studies and Theology 2 5 20 27
Total 14 100 1 352 466
Source: National Research Foundation (2007: 11).
The lack of interest from sociologists is particularly evident when

their participation is considered. In 2006 only 13 sociologists were rated
where 8 had an established researcher rating (C), two an internationally
acclaimed rating (B), two a promising young researcher rating (Y) and
only one had managed to achieve a leading international researcher or A
rating. The absence of sociologists among the rated scientists is largely
due to the fact that South African sociologists are generally very resistant
to the system. During workshops held by Webster and Fakier (2001: 13-
14) the participants raised six problems foreseen by South African
sociologists with extending the rating and evaluation system to
researchers in the social sciences and humanities.
1
Some researchers are linked to more than one specialist committee
The first problem was related to an important difference between the

natual sciences and the social sciences, namely that of the diversity in
approaches and orientations within the social sciences in general, and
sociology in particular. This diversity, it was argued, makes it
problematic to obtain consensus on the criteria that should be used for
any ranking of social scientists as well as for the actual ranking in terms
of a simple hierarchy.
Secondly, it was argued that sociologists consider their subject matter
to be inextricably linked to finding solutions for social problems over
which there is no agreement. Most sociologists find it impossible to
“divorce their own views as citizens from their work as sociologists”
(Webster & Fakier 2001: 13). This lack of basic agreement among
sociologists in different societies with regard to the way in which
judgements of intellectual work should be conducted, makes the ranking
of sociologists on the basis of their international standing highly
problematic.
A third problem with the rating system is “that the social sciences and
the humanities are grounded in a particular geographical and historical
context” (Webster & Fakier 2001: 14). In particular scholars working in
Area Studies, where their focus is on a specific region, such as in the case
of African Studies, cannot easily be ranked together with scholars
working in a specific discipline in terms of one inclusive ranking system.
The fourth problem has to do with the generalist nature of sociology.
The sociological community in South Africa is relatively small, which
makes it difficult “to find sufficient numbers of scholars who are familiar
both with the substantive focus and the method of investigation of a
researcher” (Webster & Fakier 2001: 14). The review process is
therefore inherently susceptible to all kinds of errors of judgement, while
consensus building among practitioners is difficult to achieve.
The fifth problem identified by participants is related to the
indvidualistic nature of the rating system. South African sociologists
generally prefer a more collective approach where a department or
research centre is evaluated rather than an individual. The feeling is that
research is centred on team work and that the achievements of researchers
as a team should be evaluated.
Lastly, inadequate recognition of the need for capacity building of
researchers is considered a flaw, especially the fact that insufficient credit
is given to applicants for the contribution they are making in this regard.
These concerns were identified in 2002 before the present rating
system was extended to the humanities and social sciences. It was
therefore necessary to revisit the views of South African sociologists after
the process had been in operation for five years.
238 Tina Uys
RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS
In collaboration with Bronwyn Dworzanowski-Venter, an electronic sur-

vey of South African sociologists was conducted in 2007/8 in order to
explore how they understand ‘academic citizenship,’ and how, if at all, it
is experienced and/or practised. As part of the electronic questionnaire
that was sent to a cross-section of sociologists they were asked to express
their views of the current NRF-rating system. We received a total of 38
responses from eight universities.
The biographical characteristics of the respondents are reflected in
Table 5.
Table 5: The biographical characteristics of the respondents
Race Black – 5; Coloured/Indian – 5; White – 28

Gender Men – 20; Women – 18
Age <45 – 15; 45-54 – 9; 55+ - 14
Junior academics 6 female, 2 male
(junior lecturer and 1 black, 3 Coloured/Indian, 4
8 in
lecturer) white
total
<45: 7; 45-54: 1; 55+: 0
4 female, 5 male
Middle-level
Seniority 9 in 3 black, 1 Coloured/Indian, 5
academics (senior
total white
lecturer)
<45: 6; 45-54: 2; 55+: 1
Senior academics 7 female, 14 male
(professor and 1 black, 1 Coloured/Indian, 19
21 in
associate professor) white
total
<45: 2; 45-54: 6; 55+: 13
SOCIOLOGISTS’ VIEWS ON THE EVALUATION OF

RESEARCH PERFORMANCE
The majority of sociologists who responded to the questionnaire were

senior (55%), white (74%) and male (53%). As the majority of the re-
spondents were already fairly established in their careers, one would have
expected participation from a substantial number of them. However, only
five of the respondents admitted to having applied for rating and these
were the five rated sociologists. Each of these mentioned that they ap-
plied for rating as they received pressure from the university to do so.
Moreover, there was a strong sentiment that the NRF would part with
funds more easily to rated scientists and that their university-employers
would be sure to advance more research funding upon the achievement of
rated status. A number of universities provide incentives to rated scien-
tists such as an amount of research funding being provided depending on
the level of rating achieved as well as funds for the appointment of a re-
search assistant.
Having established the linkages between the NRF, rating and re-
search funding, we considered why the vast majority of our respondents
chose not to apply for rating. Their responses were as follows:
• do not qualify for rating

• qualify for rating, but choose not to apply for rating
o object in principle to the rating system and process
o will not apply as able to access more funds elsewhere
o will apply for rating once more research work has been com-
pleted (i.e. these respondents qualify for rating, but feel it is
too early in their careers to be rated)
o was going to apply for rating but decided that it was too late in
one’s career to do so
Although the respondents generally acknowledged the central role of

peer review in determining the quality of research work, they questioned
the principle on which the present system is based as well as the
legitimacy and structure of the process by means of which a rating is
achieved. A senior rated sociologist expressed his concerns as follows:
It is a misguided attempt to imitate a dubious practice in the natural sci-

ences. It is a flawed idea in the humanities that you can rank academics
along nine different levels. We do not have such a consensus in our dis-
ciplines and it open to abuse by those who have powerful networks.
Above all, I think it leads to a narrow preoccupation with publication –
especially in international journals - at the expense of our core business,
which is teaching and building the new generation. This responsibility
is absolutely central in a country and university such as mine where we
are desperately trying to follow Harvard and Oxford at the expense of
building our own timber.
This view is supported by another unrated middle-level respondent who

argues:
240 Tina Uys
In the last while I have not been following debates on the NRF very
closely, but my sense is that this is an ambitious, but deeply flawed
process. While I do understand part of the logic to expand the rating
system used in the natural sciences to the social sciences, because it is
seen to confer some prestige to this Cinderella of the academy, this is
not an international practice, partly because there are deep and substan-
tial differences in research practice and the nature of the knowledge
generated in these two parts of the academy. In addition, the South Af-
rican research community is simply way too small to allow for the kind
of bureaucratic indifference and distance in which a fair and relatively
undamaging (to the individual applying) process of evaluation can
flourish.
In particular the NRF rating system is viewed as interference by the state

in the determination of research agendas. One respondent expressed a
strong view in this regard:
I see it as a an attempted form of state control over tertiary research

agendas (as these are predetermined to a large extent) where the hon-
our of being rated is exchanged for monetary “rewards” in the form of
research funds to be allocated and administered within University con-
text by the rated scientist on behalf of the NRF.
Another respondent indicated a similar view, although less ex-

plicitly:
I have not submitted to it as I think it is another of those externally

originated and imposed structures that erode autonomy, professionalism,
integrity and ownership of one’s work. Philosophically, there are too
many problems to evaluating sociological work to have confidence in
any ranking of outputs and hence rating of scholars. A sense of injustice
and illegitimacy is thus unavoidable.
Respondents also view the university management as being complicit in

the undermining of academic freedom as is clear from the following quo-
tation:
I also hold the view that universities undermine the conditions of

autonomous and critical scholarship to the extent that they overtly or
covertly coerce academics to apply for rating. The system and the prac-
tices are rendered particularly invidious to the extent that such coercion
is attached to – or veiled by – material inducements. The imposition of
a monopolistic arbiter of academic quality and dispenser of material

largesse is in itself destructive of scholarly values.
A further problem expressed is related to the fact that the rating

system as presently conducted favours specialisation rather than cutting
across disciplines. Those scholars involved in interdisciplinary work are
therefore disadvantaged when it comes to the determination of a rating by
a more narrowly focused research committee. Two respondents
expressed this sentiment in the following way:
The current NRF-rating system does not allow one to be regarded as a

good generalist (i.e. academic/scientist that has made high quality re-
search contributions in one’s field). The more specialized one is, the
better. I think that this is a bit restricting.
Many university-based SA scholars in the social sciences are compelled

to be generalists – which seems to be undervalued by NRF criteria.
Concerns are also expressed about the way in which the academic capital-
ism engendered by globalisation impacts on the expression of academic
citizenship and collegiality:
In the broadest sense corporate globalization which promotes individual

competitiveness and materialism which implies concentrating on one’s
own career and undertaking research on behalf of the powerful and the
privileged who can pay for it. In the immediate context the rating sys-
tem which is built on vanity, egoism and competitiveness rather than
sharing and co-operation.
Moreover, the NRF rating system does not give recognition to the
academic citizenship displayed by applicants. In a developing society
such as South Africa it is very important that scholars should be willing
to devote some of their time to building up the various institutions within
which research work is conducted, such as their departments, national
journals and professional associations. The amount of work that is done
in this regard should be considered in awarding the eventual rating that a
particular researcher receives.
A serious concern is the fact that the rating system as presently
conducted and the link that it has to the possibility of being awarded
research funding by the NRF could give rise to the so-called Matthew
Effect, namely that those who have received more opportunities in the
past at doing research, are more likely to receive them in the future
242 Tina Uys
(Laudel 2006: 377). This is especialy the case as no consideration is

given to the working conditions at the particular institution of the
researcher or the extent to which they provide a disabling or enabling
environment for conducting good quality research.
Finally, the NRF is viewed as giving inadequate recognition to the
sociohistorical context within which the rating of South African social
scientists is taking place. As one senior sociologist expressed it:
The NRF criteria place too much emphasis on “international recogni-

tion” (in apparent ignorance of the political and social structures of
knowledge hierarchies in the academic world), [and associated with the
above] indicators such as citation indexes reflect, for the most part, both
the geographical concentrations of scholarship and the density of para-
digmatic, research tradition and thematic communities (which are often
exclusivist and difficult to penetrate) which are not easily accessible to
SA scholars – and which perforce subject their work to scrutiny by as-
sessors that may be relatively ignorant of a particular field of specialisa-
tion.
In particular, the emphasis the NRF rating places on the applicant’s inter-
national standing directs South African social scientists towards ensuring
that their research has a sufficient international flavour so that it would be
of interest to sociologists elsewhere.
In order for an applicant to achieve a high ranking (A and B), most of

their reviewers must be convinced that the applicant’s research has a
considerable international reputation. This system is prejudiced against
any applicant who studies a society outside Western Europe and North
America. The reason for this is the colonial nature of social science.
Whereas the subject matter of physicists or chemist remains the same
the world over, South African sociologists are obliged to study South
African society rather than British society. No matter how pathbreaking
and excellent, a study of South African society would have no impact
on debates about British society. The colonial character of social sci-
ence is such that only studies of Western European and US society are
considered ‘international’. So, for example a study of social class in the
US would be considered a key contribution to debates about social class.
A study of class in South Africa would be considered relevant only to
South Africa or maybe Africa or the developing world. On these terms,
it is therefore much more difficult for social scientists to achieve ‘con-
siderable international recognition.’
CONCLUSION
The value and functioning of the NRF rating system is debated within
and without the social sciences in South Africa. This is clearly reflected
in the responses obtained from our cohort of sociologists. The fact re-
mains that even the harshest critics of the rating process choose to resist
in absentia, rather than taking on the state and the NRF in a more direct
way.
In conclusion, it could be argued that although the rating system as
implemented in South Africa at present, is flawed in many ways, it also
has distinct advantages that could be retained through a thorough rethink
of the system. It is the only way in which we can benchmark ourselves to
our colleagues nationally as well as internationally. As far as could be
determined, this system of peer reviewing is unique in the world. It
provides some objective mechanism, however imperfect, of comparing
the research ability of scholars with each other. The feedback that is
provided by the NRF to the individual researcher makes an important
contribution towards improving the quality of his/her work. At the very
least, completing the research profile that is required forces researchers to
consider what they are doing and why they are doing it. It is a system
that should be improved and refined rather than being rejected altogether
as many South African sociologists presently are inclined to do.
Sociologists should actively engage the NRF, the state and university
managements rather than withdrawing. In this way we would acknowl-
edge our acceptance of the basic academic principles of peer review and
benchmarking. However, the principles and the process of rating should
be revisited, making it transparent and open to input from all stakeholders.
In particular, there should be recognition of the collective nature of the
research enterprise through the rating of departments rather than indi-
viduals. An appreciation for the importance of the academic citizenship
role of researchers and the redefinition of international recognition should
form an important part of the reconstitution of the evaluation of research
quality in South Africa.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Buchbinder, H. “The Market Oriented University and the Changing Role

of Knowledge.” Higher Education 26, no. 3 (1993): 331-347.
Burawoy, M. 2004. “Public sociology: South African Dilemmas in a
Global Context.” Society in Transition 35, no. 1 (2004): 11-26.
244 Tina Uys
David, P. “The Knowledge Factory.” The Economist 345, no. 8037 (1997)
supplement.
Jansen, J. “The State of Higher Education in South Africa: From Massifi-
cation to Mergers.” In State of the nation: South Africa 2003-2004
edited by J. Daniel, A. Habib, and R. Southall, pp. 290-311. Cape
Town: HSRC Press, 2003.
Kaplan, D. “Universities and the Business Sector: Strengthening the
Links.” Social Dynamics 23, no. 1 (1997): 68-76.
Laudel, G. “The ‘Quality Myth’: Promoting and Hindering Conditions for
Acquiring Research Funds.” Higher Education 52 (2006): 375-403.
Miller, H. “Academics and Their Labour Process.” In White-Collar Work:
the Non-Manual Labour Process edited by C. Smith, D. Knights and
H. Willmott, pp. 109-37. London: Macmillan, 1991.
Moja, T., N. Cloete, and N. Olivier. “Is Moving from Co-operative Gov-
ernance to Conditional Autonomy a Contribution to Effective Gov-
ernance?” CHET report, 2002.
National Research Foundation. Workshop with Convenors of Assessment
Panels and members of the executive evaluation commitee.
Unpublished document. Pretoria: NRF, 2004.
National Research Foundation. Rating Brochure: The Evaluation and
Rating of the Research Performance of Researchers in South Africa
through the National Researach Foundation. Pretoria: NRF, 2005.
-----. Evaluation and Rating: Facts & Figures. Pretoria: NRF, 2007.
Nixon, J. “‘Not Without Dust and Heat’: The Moral Bases of the ‘New’
Academic Professionalism.” British Journal of Educational Studies
49, no. 2 (2001):173-186.
Orr, L. “Globalisation and Universities: Towards the Market University.”
Social Dynamics 23, no. 1(1997): 42-67.
Wasser, H. “Changes in the European University: From Traditional to
Entrepreneurial.” Higher Education Quarterly 44, no. 2 (1990): 110-
22.
Webster, E. and K. Fakier. Evaluating research performance: the need
for a developmental approach in sociology. Unpublished report.
Johannesburg: SWOP, 2001.
Webster, E. and G. Adler. “Toward a Class Compromise in South
Africa’s ‘Double Transition’: Bargained Liberalization and the
Consolidation of Democracy.” Politics and Society 27, no. 3 (1999):
347-385.
Ylijoki, O-H. “Entangled in Academic Capitalism? A Case-Study on
Changing Ideals and Practices of University Research.” Higher
Education 45, no. 3 (2003):307-335.
Poverty Fighters in Academia 245
Poverty Fighters in Academia:

The Subversion of the Notion of Socially
Engaged Science in the Mozambican Higher
Education System
University of Cape Town, South Africa1
This paper is a free-ranging discussion of several issues that arose for me

in the course of public debates I was involved in on universities, academ-
ics’ engagement with society (Serra 2007a), the appointment of vice-
chancellors by the head of state, and the role of universities in society, for
example in the alleviation of absolute poverty (Ali 2005), that are taking
place in Mozambique and elsewhere. It is intended neither as a focused
commentary on these debates, nor as a systematic analysis of their argu-
ments and evidence. The aim here is to raise certain issues that emerge, or
are presupposed, in discussions of the role of universities and academics,
as well as the limits of political discourse within the academic space.
Specifically the paper contests the emergent conceptualisation of the uni-
versity in Mozambique as an instrument for addressing government so-
cioeconomic agenda, in this case, fighting absolute poverty.
The ongoing instrumentalization of the university in Mozambique is
consistent with a number of notions of socially engaged science. Scholars
have promoted “Mode-2 science” (Gibbons et. Al 1994), “mandated sci-
ence” (Salter 1988, 2003), “postacademic science” (Ziman 1996, 2000),
and “socially robust science, or science in the agora” (Nowotny et al.
2003). These scholars have developed an all-encompassing body of
knowledge with slightly different nuances, but that preaches and agitates
for a socially engaged approach in science. This new approach is mainly
characterized by accounting for the fundamental changes in the relation-
ship between science, higher education (universities), and the exogenous
world (particularly industry), in what has been called a third “mission”—
or “triple helix”—of the university (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 2000).
1
The author can be reached at [email protected].
246 Patrício Langa
Overall, this notion has been promoted as an approach to academic prac-

tice that is aimed at contextualising both teaching and research for opti-
mal social intervention. It is argued that this approach to science has im-
plications for the relationship between the state and the university, espe-
cially with regards to the values of academic freedom, institutional
autonomy, and knowledge production.
Globally, higher education systems, and universities in particular,
come in a remarkable variety of forms, including in their basic relation to
the state and the political economy (Du Toit 2006). Thus, notions such as
“institutional autonomy,” “academic freedom,” and “accountability,” for
instance, need clarification and need to be contextualized before attempt-
ing any kind of analysis. Claims about the absence or presence of “aca-
demic freedom” may have different meanings according to the nuance
these notions take in a particular context. A historical background of the
higher education system is thus crucial in order to contextualize the use
of the term “academic freedom” and “institutional autonomy” for the
purposes of this paper.
Academic freedom and institutional autonomy are important condi-
tions for the development of science (Mamdani and Diouf 1994). Aca-
demic freedom comprises the freedom to operate in line with an individ-
ual and institutional teaching and a research agenda that is not directly
linked to immediate political objectives. I acknowledge that academics
would be within their right to pursue scholarship that is linked to imme-
diate political objectives. However, there is the risk of compromising the
establishment and pursuit of an academic project that contributes to
(qualify) science. Therefore, academic freedom relying on “swing agen-
das” of the politics of the day is worthless to pursue. This is also valid for
institutional autonomy. As I understand it, the concept of autonomy en-
tails the institutional power to decide on the mission, vision, and objec-
tive of the institution within the broader lawful framework of the state.
This paper is organized into four sections. I start by providing a brief
historical background of the Mozambican higher education system. In the
second section, I look at some theoretical remarks on the issue of socially
engaged science and present the problem in question. In the third section,
I provide some evidence from the Mozambican experience. The fourth
section is the conclusion.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF MOZAMBIQUE’S

HIGHER EDUCATION
This section provides a brief socio-political and historical overview of the

Mozambican higher education system and its evolving features. For pur-
poses of this analysis, the country’s history of higher education is divided
into three phases.
Phase One: Colonial Higher Education
The first phase covers the period from 1962 to 1975. In 1962, the Portu-
guese colonial government established Mozambique’s first higher educa-
tion institution, the General University Studies of Mozambique (EGUM),
for the children of Portuguese settlers (Mário et al. 2003: 7; Beverwijk
2005: 15; Langa 2006: 15-16). In 1968, EGUM was granted the status of
a full university and changed its name to University of Lourenço Marques
(ULM). The ideology prevailing at that time conceived higher education
as an exclusive privilege of a certain category of individuals: the sons and
daughters of the Portuguese settlers. Thus, indigenous Mozambicans
were excluded from the country’s higher education system (Mondlane
1997). Social engagement of the university – if at all discernible at this
stage – merely strengthened and perpetuated the colonial divide between
settler and native. The sole university was merely a branch of a Portu-
guese university on colonial territory.
Phase Two: A Socialist Experiment
Covering the period from 1975 to 1986, the second phase is marked by
the experiment of the socialist regime that followed the country’s inde-
pendence in 1975. In 1976, the sole university left by the Portuguese was
transformed into a national university and named after Eduardo Mond-
lane, the assassinated first president of the Mozambican Liberation Front
(FRELIMO), the ruling party since independence. In 1977, the FRE-
LIMO government adopted Marxist-Leninist ideology with single party
rule, which led to a centrally planned higher education system with clear
prescriptions regarding mission, curriculum, staff, students, and the entire
infrastructure (Beverwjik 2005: 15). It was the task of the Ministry of
Education to centrally plan and establish the number of students to enrol
in primary, secondary, and tertiary education, decide on the location and
the kind of institutions to be opened every year (Resolução 8/79 de 3 de
Julho de 1979; Mário et al. 2003; Gonçalves 2007: 614). The university
thus stood at the forefront of the socialist revolution attempt and the con-
248 Patrício Langa
struction of the new nation-state with science being regarded as the tool
to liberate the people by its first president Samora Machel (Machel 1974a,
1974b, 1976). There was no space to even consider issues such as auton-
omy and academic freedom at the time; these were non-issues.
According to Mayntz (1998), one of the basic structural characteris-
tics of the science system in socialist countries has been the concentration
of state-financed, basic, and problem-oriented research in national acad-
emies. While in the Western tradition, academies were primarily, and
have largely remained, learned societies, the term signified large research
establishments of national scope in socialist countries. Here, the notion of
a socially engaged science and university gains some relevance, since the
state defines science and higher education as a developmental tool for the
country (Drori et al. 2003). It was with this approach that two more uni-
versities that are public were subsequently established. In 1985 and 1986,
respectively, the government created the Higher Pedagogical Institute
(ISP) and the Higher Institute for International Relations (ISRI). The
former was responsible for training secondary school teachers. In 1995,
ISP was granted full university status, becoming Pedagogical University
(UP), without a major mission shift. Former president Joaquim Chissano
while in charge of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs instigated the estab-
lishment of ISRI. Its mission was to train diplomats at a higher level
(Mário et al. 2003; Langa 2006). Later on, I will explore the implications
of this historical legacy, highlighting that it determines the role of univer-
sities and academics even today.
Phase Three: Transition to Democracy and Market Oriented Economy
This phase covers the period from 1986 to date. During this period, the
country experienced a transition from socialism to democracy and mar-
ket-driven economy with implications for higher education. The most
important change within the higher education system was the introduction
of a new law (No.1/93, and revised in 2002) (Mário et al., 2003:10;
Beverwijk, 2005: 15; Langa, 2006: 18). This new law marked the begin-
ning of a new era of multiple suppliers of higher education including pri-
vate ones. Importantly, the new law lays particular emphasis on the no-
tion of autonomy. It describes “autonomy” and “academic freedom” as
follows:
Autonomy is the capacity of higher education institutions to exercise

their powers, perform the necessary obligations, to pursue academic
freedom at an administrative, financial, patrimonial and scientific-
pedagogic level, according to the institutions’ objectives, strategies of

the sector, policies and national plans (MESCT 2003: 3).
The new law had a number of major consequences. The most visible
one was the mushrooming of new privately owned higher education insti-
tutions. From three public universities in 1993 the number of higher edu-
cation institutions increased to more than 30 institutions, both private and
public (Langa 2006: 108).
The first private university to open was the Higher Polytechnic and
University Institute (ISPU), followed by the Catholic University (UCM).
Both were established in 1995. ISPU and UCM were followed in 1998 by
the Higher Institute of Science and Technology of Mozambique (ISC-
TEM), and by the Islamic Mussa Bin Bique University (UMBB). In 2000,
the Higher Institute of Transport and Communication (ISUTC) was also
established. Currently, the higher education system in Mozambique com-
prises a diverse and differentiated constellation of institutions (Beverwijk
2005; Langa 2006: vii).
At the systemic level, it is considered that the introduction of the new
law aimed to reduce the level of direct government intervention. For pub-
lic universities, government would be restricted to paying staff and main-
taining facilities and equipment. Decision-making rested with the respec-
tive public universities (Beverwijk 2005). Berverwijk also notes that the
advisory role assumed by the vice-chancellors to the government on
higher education policy is a sign of substantive freedom in terms of insti-
tutional management. For instance, vice-chancellors of public universities
would negotiate funding for their institutions directly with the Minister of
Planning and Finance. These are some of the indicators of a changing
system, increasingly focusing on the “autonomy” of its institutions.
Overall, recent developments in the Mozambican higher education
system display a process of expansion, differentiation (public and private).
From one institution located in Maputo, higher education institutions
were established almost in each of the 11 provinces in the country, in
what could be considered one of the most rapid processes of expansion.
THEORETICAL REMARKS AND THE PROBLEM
In recent years, universities have been experiencing mounting pressure to

contribute to the economic, social, and environmental well-being of the
regions in which they are situated and to establish closer links with the
regions (Harding et al. 2007). As higher education institutions strive to
survive in times of fundamental changes and financial constraints, a new
250 Patrício Langa
character of the institutions and new attitudes of academic staff emerge.

An example of such emergent institutional characters is what Slaughter
and Leslie (1997) describe as “academic capitalism” or the involvement
of colleges and faculties in market-like behaviours.
This newly evolving discourse of socially engaged science as op-
posed to traditional ways of producing science and running universities,
is arguably responsible for the emergent subversion of the core business
of universities, undermining the very “raison d’être” of that distinctive
institution. This subversion occurs when social engagement is pursued in
advance of a well-established scientific base or disciplinary oriented
knowledge (Muller 2000). Muller argues that Mode 2 (problem-solving
base science) knowledge production depends on Mode 1 (disciplinary
base science) knowledge production. Thus, it is indispensable, as a first
step to strengthen and consolidate Mode 1 in the institutions; Mode 2 de-
velopment would then follow. Mode 2 does not have to be created since it
is market-driven: it has to be facilitated, or encouraged to develop, and
regulated (Muller 2000: 45). This point is suggestive because from what I
have observed in Mozambique, the political discourse of fighting abso-
lute poverty is driving institutions to prematurely move from Mode 1 to
Mode 2 whilst Mode 1 remains very underdeveloped, as I will attempt to
demonstrate.
Historically, universities have developed an academic culture
grounded in a fundamental belief in academic freedom, institutional
autonomy, as well as the unity of research and teaching. In stark contrast
to these underlying principles, Mozambican politicians have resorted to
the notion of social engagement (fighting poverty) as legitimation for
their interference in the business of universities. The increasing impor-
tance ascribed to universities in the context of globalisation and knowl-
edge economy, has propelled governments all over the world, and par-
ticularly so in developing countries, to regulate universities in order to
transform them into instruments of social change and economic and tech-
nological development (Kellermann 2007; Boulton and Lucas 2008).
As argued by Boulton and Lucas (2008: 5), public policy sees uni-
versities as vectors of the contemporary skilling of an increasing segment
of the population and as providers of innovation that can be translated
into advantage in a fast changing global economic environment. Yet they
also stress that, whereas universities help to create an environment sym-
pathetic to and supportive of innovation, especially where it is associated
with high quality and internationally competitive research, innovation
itself is predominantly a process of business engagement with markets in
which universities can only play a minor role. The essential aspect of this
argument is that universities’ commitment to education in the deepest
sense—knowledge for its own sake—remains to its exploration of the

limits of human understanding. While the narrow view of higher educa-
tion frequently focuses on science and technology—as I will attempt to
demonstrate later with the case of the dismissal of the social sciences in
Mozambique as useful disciplines to fight absolute poverty—it is the so-
cial sciences and humanities that are more prepared to the describe the
“topography” of society as suggested by Macamo (2005).
The social sciences and humanities can be concerned with issues that
are fundamental to the constitution of poverty as social phenomena, not
with the preached teleological belief of its eradication. They can provide
a framework to understand why and how poverty presents itself as a real-
ity as well as how it is constructed and experienced differently by differ-
ent individuals, groups, and cultures. Such forms of understanding pre-
vents poverty to be regarded as a technical problem of a malfunctioning
society seeking technical solutions from science and technology or from
the one-size-fit-all prescription and programmes of development and pov-
erty eradication of the development aid industry (e.g. World Bank,
International Monetary Fund, Millennium Development Goals) (Sachs
2005).
As Elzinga (2002) has convincingly argued in his critique of
Mode 2 and Triple helix,
the projection of new research policy models fixes only on a small clus-
ter of areas in a broad and variegated tapestry of modern science, which
includes all kinds of sites and institutions. They largely take events in
areas like biotechnology and microelectronics and now also increas-
ingly research into advanced industrial materials as their main reference,
areas where the promise of commercial profits is strongest. We hear
nothing about changes in astronomy, natural history museums, lan-
guage laboratories or departments of archaeology and musicology.
Thus, the new models are fostering a new particularism while claiming
generality. Furthermore, they conflate technical characteristics of semi-
automation in knowledge production at the science-society interface.
Consequently, the new images of scientific knowledge production have
a social epistemology that is rather limited in scope. They are ideologi-
cally coloured totalizations of another segment of the knowledge pro-
duction landscape. (19)
The misconception of the role and limits of universities to solve so-

cial problems leads to the use of regulations and incentives, especially
financial, to obtain forms of behaviour in universities that provide out-
comes defined as desirable within a short-term frame of reference. The
252 Patrício Langa
general attitude of the Mozambican government that underlies its policies

towards higher education, for instance, is based on some serious misun-
derstandings of the role and function of higher education, particularly
those of the universities. The Mozambican government under president
Armando Guebuza regards the higher education system as no more than
an army, whose soldiers should fight for economic development and pov-
erty eradication. It should be noted that while soldiers are expected to
unquestionably follow the orders of their commander, in academia,
scholars are expected to be independent thinkers seeking understanding
through research analysis and rational argument. The political discourse
about the role of the university derives not only from a flawed and reduc-
tionist understanding of the role of the university, but also undermines its
very foundations and capacity to socially engage meaningfully.
Universities in Africa particularly, but elsewhere as well, are under
pressure to become more responsive to exogenous demands and pressures
(Cloete et al. 2006; Muller 2001). There is pressure to produce applied
research as opposed to basic research (Glaser 2001); socially “relevant”
and policy-driven and problem-solving research (Gibbons et. al 1994). It
is argued that knowledge needs to be “socially robust” as its validity is no
longer determined solely by scientific communities, but increasingly by
much wider communities of engagement, comprising knowledge produc-
ers, disseminators, traders, and users (Nowotny et al., 2003; Gibbons
2001, 2006; Hall 2008). There is also mounting pressure to increase the
number of graduates from programmes that are market-oriented as well
as areas that are considered to increase production.
Even though there may be different approaches in accounting for
these pressures, it is also true that most higher education systems are go-
ing through changes that are strongly marked by global trends and pres-
sures (Maassen and Cloete 2006). How higher education institutions are
responding to these pressures is a matter that concerns various academics
in their research (Rip 1997; Muller 2001; Gumport 2000). It has become
customary to say, that the “republic of science” is turning into the “entre-
preneurial university” (Slaughter and Leslie 1997) because it has lost the
autonomy upon which it was built (Rip and van der Meulen 1996; De-
lanty 2001).
Current debates on the function of universities tend to consider two
kinds of challenges universities face in contemporary society: on the one
hand, it is considered that society presents itself with a new and growing
demand for higher education, while on the other, the state at the same
time applies increasingly restrictive policies to the funding of its activities
(Conceição et al. 1998: 203). Gumport also suggests that “if one uses the
lens of “social institution” to examine the institutional imperatives for
public higher education, one sees educational organizations devoted to a

wide array of social functions that have been expanded over time: the
development of individual learning and human capital, the socialization
and cultivation of citizens and political loyalties, the preservation of
knowledge, and the fostering of other legitimate pursuits for the nation-
state” (Gumport 2000). Castells distinguishes four major functions on the
theoretical level whose specific weight in each historical era defines the
predominant role of a given university system and the specific task of
each university within the overall university system: firstly, the genera-
tion and transmission of ideology; secondly, the selection and formation
of the dominant elites; thirdly, the production and application of knowl-
edge, and fourthly, the training of the skilled labour force (Castells 2001:
206-10).
Some of these perspectives may sound quite problematic, such as
Castells’ four functions, as they are more normative in nature than actu-
ally describing the functions of universities. Consider, for instance, the
function of “generation and transmission of ideology” or that of “selec-
tion and formation of elites.” They are so normative that anyone could
identify them in any university system as long as he or she is inclined to.
However, in fulfilling some of these functions, higher education institu-
tions need to maintain a functioning relationship, for instance, with both
the state and the market without becoming a willing tool of either, as
suggested by Weiler (2008). For, as Weiler maintains, universities are
marked by a profound ambivalence in their quest for a clear and unambi-
guous role in society. This seems to be the case with the Mozambican
higher education system, where public institutions struggle to maintain a
clear and consistent identity when it comes to their role in society.
Public universities are being asked to become more locally relevant,
connect aggressively with the productive sector and promote “useful”
knowledge, graduate more students than their installed capacity and so
forth. Academics, on their part, are being urged to engage directly in pro-
jects that will contribute to poverty alleviation. The fact that the govern-
ment always find a way to impose its agendas on public higher education
institutions is not new; however, the manner in which this is being con-
ducted in Mozambique (discussed in the subsequent section) raises some
pressing concerns. The struggle against absolute poverty is becoming a
serious threat to academic freedom in the country today. This struggle,
which was placed on top of the political agenda by the ruling FRELIMO
party and its president Armando Guebuza upon his election in 2004, ap-
pears to be constraining academics in their ability to formulate the issues
relating to poverty in strict observation of scientific criteria. The instru-
mental view of academics as social engineers with professional skills to
254 Patrício Langa
fix all social problems is driving academics away from their main “raison
d’être”: to formulate problems scientifically in ways that allow decision-
makers to take action according to their own political priorities. My claim
here is that academics are being confronted with ethical responsibilities
as opposed to a research agenda.
This problem, however, is not limited to Mozambique, but pertains to
the entire continent. In October 2008, the e-forum on African - US e-
consultation formulated the vision that universities in Africa should, if
they were to receive any financial support, pursue strong links with the
productive sector and increase the number of graduates in areas consid-
ered strategic for the production of basic needs and goods (MacGregor
2008a). Country leaders, international donors, and other social agents
influencing the life of universities in Africa constantly reinforce this idea
of the university on different occasions. Because of this, and as will be
demonstrated below, academics are stranded in their space of limited le-
gitimacy by the poverty fighters in academia.
Concluding this section, I should highlight that the challenge for pub-
lic universities in Mozambique lies in maintaining their integrity by keep-
ing core institutional features intact, while at the same time pursuing
these new approaches under the mounting political pressure from gov-
ernment. This may appear to be a “mission impossible” given that the
“political discourse,” more so than the discussed epistemological “ide-
ologies,” seems to be the main force constraining the lawfully established
autonomy of higher education institutions. In the next section, I will at-
tempt a characterization of the academic environment and the relationship
between academics and politics in Mozambique.
FROM POLITICS OF RELEVANCE TO RELEVANCE

OF POLITICS
In the subsequent discussion, I attempt to illustrate the instrumentalisa-

tion of the university in Mozambique and how political imperatives are
interfering in the determination of research agenda and institutional
autonomy.
Role of Academics
In Mozambique, the pressures on public universities to socially engage

with their communities became more visible with the introduction of the
poverty eradication agenda by Guebuza’s government beginning 2005.
Indeed, it appears as though academics are following in the steps of the
freedom fighters of the liberation struggle and have become “poverty

fighters.” At every opportunity, the president and members of his cabinet
address public universities and they emphasise the vital role academia
should play in the fight against poverty. In this process, the complex re-
lationship between higher education and development as well as poverty
eradication risks being overlooked.
In fact, academics are no longer suspicious of the problematic rela-
tionship between their role in academia and the edges of social and politi-
cal engagement. A major consequence of this trend is the subversion of a
genuine “academic culture” marked by academic values and practices
such as the production of knowledge for its own sake, academic peer re-
viewed publications, and conferences concerned with the progress of dis-
ciplinary knowledge, to mention just a few. By pursuing these values,
academics would be in a better position to formulate scientific problems
in a manner that positively informs policy.
While pursuing the political agenda of fighting poverty, Mozambican
academics are lagging behind in every aspect that concerns the values and
culture of conventional science and “academic culture.” If we take scien-
tific publications for instance, Mozambique’s contribution is appallingly
insignificant. According to a forthcoming article in the journal Scien-
tometrics on the state of science and technology across the continent, Af-
rican researchers produce only 1.8% of the world’s total scholarly publi-
cations – half the figure of Latin America and substantially less than In-
dia. South Africa and Egypt produced half of all of Africa’s internation-
ally recognised publications between 2000 and 2004, while 88% of in-
ventive activity was concentrated in South Africa (MacGregor 2008b).
Mozambique does not make it onto the list, as their figures of scientific
publications are not worth mentioning. The country occupies the penul-
timate position in a ranking of 32 countries on the bibliometrical per-
formance profiles of African countries (Mouton 2008).
If a research project does not somehow state as its central purpose its
contribution to the eradication of absolute poverty, it is likely to be re-
garded as irrelevant. If we take a quick glance at the projects that are eli-
gible for funding from the National Funds for Innovation (NFI) of the
Ministry of Science and Technology (MCT), we will soon notice that
every single project has its virtue mostly based on how the ultimate goal
of eradicating poverty is articulated. Here, there is no need to mention
that the social sciences are entirely excluded from eligibility for such
funds seeing as they are considered (utterly) irrelevant. Out of 42 grants
for research and innovation projects approved by the NFI in 2007/2008,
only one went to education and none to social science. In fact, social sci-
ence ranked at the bottom of the top priority areas of research (Alsácia
256 Patrício Langa
2008). There is no doubt that the main criteria of relevance here is politi-
cal. A research project has to be “politically correct,” i.e. focus on fight-
ing poverty, even if its scientific claims would make the least qualified
scientific board raise their eyebrows. This is the context in which public
universities are being urged to socially engage. What we can therefore
infer from the current academic environment is that the “politics of scien-
tific legitimacy and relevance” are being overthrown by “politics of so-
cial engagement, legitimacy, and relevance.”
This means that whereas the former is compatible with the scientific
determination of priorities concerning social engagement by virtue of the
fact that academics themselves set the agenda, the latter inevitably leads
to the political determination of public universities’ priorities and ethical
responsibilities.
Law, Autonomy and Academic Freedom
In the following, I present specific articles of the new law on higher edu-
cation to draw attention to the discrepancy between the provisions of this
law and the lack of practical implementation of its progressive objectives.
The new Law (2003) of higher education stipulates in Article 5 with re-
gard to the notion of autonomy that the institutions themselves are to de-
cide on what is relevant for the university in Mozambique. The autonomy
attributed to higher education institutions in conformity with their objec-
tives and national policies and plans, particularly regarding education,
science, and culture, encompasses the following powers: (1) defining the
areas of study, plans, programmes, scientific, cultural, and artistic re-
search projects; (2) teaching, lecturing, and researching according to the
convictions of the academic staff and without any form of coercion; (3)
creating, suspending, and discontinuing courses (programmes); (4) de-
signing the course curriculum and developing the respective plans (pro-
grammes) in collaboration with the labour market; (5) approving aca-
demic regulations; (6) creating or disestablishing units such as academic
departments, schools, and faculties, and defining the respective statutes;
(7) recruiting, promoting, discharging, and exercising disciplinary actions
against the academic staff, researchers, administrative staff, and students
in accordance with the law; (8) availing of the infrastructure in accor-
dance with the applicable law; (9) generating the necessary income for its
activities in observance of the applicable law; (10) managing the budget
transparently in accordance with applicable law; (11) and establishing
cooperation agreements in scientific, teaching, and extension (services)
domains with national and international entities. As the listed stipulations
clearly show, this law appears to be highly progressive as it lays down the
major principles of academic freedom and institutional autonomy.
Progressive laws, however, do not necessarily entail a progressive
implementation. The gap between what the law preaches and its imple-
mentation is a separate story. In the case of Mozambique, the public po-
litical discourse of poverty eradication brought about by Guebuza’s gov-
ernment is eager to set the agenda for public universities and therewith
undermines academic freedom. The president constantly stresses what he
considers ought to be the role of higher education in his plan to “fight
absolute poverty.” At any given opportunity, he reiterates the role that
technical, professional, and higher education should play in job creation,
the promotion of health and hygiene, and in promoting production which,
in turn, will lead to the reduction in prices. In a recent interview with a
journalist, he stated that “we cannot eradicate poverty without university
and technical education, because it is at these universities and schools
that people learn the strategies for attacking poverty [my emphasis]”
(Guebuza 2008).
Theoretically, while universities and academics may have the capac-
ity to distinguish between the political discourses of state politicians and
party officials and the rights granted to them by the new law, the rem-
nants of socialist forms of authority and obedience to the leader or party
officials seems to tacitly creep into the university environment and un-
dermine the academic power to criticise. For instance, the surreptitious
reinstitution of party cells (a small organisational structure of the ruling
party that gathers regularly in specific areas) within public offices includ-
ing the universities is creating a suspicious environment within academia
and is regarded by some academics as a means to control their activities
and minds. While party structures and activities are not necessarily un-
welcome in the academic environment and not even against the law, they
may pose a serious threat to academic freedom and institutional auton-
omy in cases like Mozambique due to its recent communist past.
As Clarke (1983: 152-154) acknowledges, in developing countries,
particularly where communist rule strengthened explicit political forms of
coordination by means of the dual and interpenetrating dominance of a
single political party and the one-party regime over all, there is a deepen-
ing involvement of politics in education. Politicians tend to see education
as a basic sector for nation-building efforts, ranging from the training of
essential experts to the building of national culture and consensus. They
often feel—and this seems to be the case in Mozambican higher educa-
tion—that they must intervene so as to ensure the system’s relevance to
pressing practical problems (regarding poverty, land use, and industriali-
zation, for example) and which politicians feels professors might other-
258 Patrício Langa
wise ignore in their pursuit of the academic models they know best but
which are imported from highly developed societies. Therefore, politici-
zation, in the most primary sense, is frequent and intense in developing
societies in the contemporary period, often producing bitter struggles be-
tween state officials and academics.
Who Pays the Piper Calls the Tune
The “politics of social engagement, legitimacy, and relevance” in the

struggle against poverty pervades higher education in Mozambique and
subverts the logic of “politics of scientific legitimacy and relevance.” In
this section, I provide some evidence for this form of subversion with a
few examples of recent appointments of new vice-chancellors at public
universities by the president. Quotes from the inaugural lecture delivered
at EMU in 2005 by the current Minister of Education and Culture will
shed some light on my argument.
The president’s discourse of “fighting absolute poverty” is mostly
echoed by senior members of government, particularly the Minister of
Education and Culture as well as by the recently appointed vice-
chancellors of public universities. It is important to mention in this con-
text, that it is the president, who appoints the vice-chancellors of the pub-
lic universities in Mozambique. In this regard, he is not compelled to ap-
point the nominees that come out of the internal—“democratic and
autonomous”—selection process that takes place within the universities.
This is another legacy of the former socialist regime (as the status of vice-
chancellors was equivalent to that of deputy-ministers), which has been
left untouched. That means universities can engage themselves in an in-
ternal—“democratic and autonomous”—process to select three nominees,
one of whom the president then appoints as vice-chancellor. However, he
can simply skate over the internal selection process, dump these names,
and appoint someone totally unrelated to a particular university.
This happened recently when the president appointed the current
vice-chancellors of three public universities: Eduardo Mondlane Univer-
sity (EMU), Pedagogic University (PU) and the Higher Institute for In-
ternational Relations (ISRI). For instance, the current vice-chancellor of
EMU Filipe Couto is the fifth since independence in 1975. Until his
nomination in 2008, he had no connections whatsoever with EMU. Even
though he has a background in education management, as he was the
former vice-chancellor of the Catholic University of Mozambique. His
strong links with the ruling party (he was a freedom fighter) are com-
monly said to be the reason behind his nomination (MediaFAX 2007).
This is not the only case of an “academic outsider” being appointed

as vice chancellor based on his political connections. EMU’s former
Vice-Chancellor Brazão Mazula held office for nearly twelve years. For-
mer President Joaquim Chissano appointed him after he had served as the
president of the National Electoral Commission (NEC) from 1992 to
1994 and organized the first general democratic elections in 1994. Chis-
sano won these elections. More so than his academic credentials, it was
the reputation he gained from conducting what was considered a success-
ful electoral process for a country that had just emerged from 16 years of
“civil” war. Apart from the recently deceased Fernando Ganhão, ap-
pointed as the university’s first vice-chancellor in 1976, only Narciso Ma-
tos, a chemical engineer and the third in the list, was from the university.
The second vice-chancellor, the Jurist Rui Baltazar, used to be Minister
of Finance. After Narciso Matos follows Brazão Mazula from the NEC,
as I have mentioned earlier. This situation has led some academics (Serra
2007b; Langa 2007, 2008) to question the existence of an internal selec-
tion process for nominees, seeing that the president, another outsider, can
simply appoint whomever he considers the appropriate vice-chancellor.
The current vice-chancellor of EMU has adopted the political catch-
phrase of the president’s “manifesto”—fight against absolute poverty—
and made it his main task to implement at the university. In his first inter-
view with the press following his appointment, the vice-chancellor issued
the following statement commenting on what he would consider the main
priorities of the university.
Increase EMU participation in the fight against absolute poverty by

strongly engaging with the districts,2 training graduates of high quality
and extraordinary visions to create their own jobs. This role should not
be regarded as ‘undermining’ the institution, but as an important contri-
bution to the national cause [my emphasis]. This role should to be pur-
sued in partnership with different state institutions. As EMU is huge,
these tasks should be decentralized, where my collaborators should
have a more active and incisive role. (…) another important point is the
establishment of a firm collaboration with state institutions, where es-
sential subjects such as Agronomy, Veterinary and Genetics should be
matter of co-operation between UEM and the state. (Couto, quoted in
Filimone 2007: 3)
2
In Mozambique, the district is the local level of the state administration. It is a
subdivision of the supreme level of the local administration of the state above the
province. The district is then subdivided into administrative posts and these in
turn into localities, the lowest hierarchical level of state administration division
in Mozambique.
260 Patrício Langa
The example of EMU very much resembles the current situation at

other Mozambican public higher education institutions. The new vice
chancellors’ views are in tune with the slogan “fight absolute poverty,”
that the government has declared as its main priority. The saying “who
pays the piper calls the tune,” therefore, certainly rings true for the cur-
rent state of the relationship between politics and academics in the con-
text of higher education in Mozambique.
Useful and Useless Sciences
The Minister of Education and Culture, whose former cabinet adviser was
the current vice-chancellor of EMU, reduced the practical utility of social
sciences and humanities by considering them useless for the “honour-
able” national duty to “fight absolute poverty.” In an inaugural lecture at
EMU, he voiced his concerns about the current structure of the curricu-
lum and programmes of universities, which graduate more students en-
rolled in these programmes (social science and humanities) than in natu-
ral sciences (see table 1):
Areas such as Economy, Social Sciences and Law are important to

build our society, for management enhancement and the development
of a state of law. Nonetheless, in order to meet the millennium devel-
opment goals, and to strengthen the action plan for absolute poverty re-
duction, it is important to strengthen training areas directly related to
production, health care, and education. (Ali 2005: 5)
Table 1: Students enrolled, graduated and admitted by scientific area
Students
University
2005 2006
New New
Scientific area Registered Graduated Registered Graduated
Admissions Admissions
Public
9036
Education 1522 293 526 16860 1202
Arts and
2723 585 938 1019 116 308
Humanities
Social sciences,
management, 5868 629 1422 4113 414 1338
law
Natural
3547 337 1339 3224 281 832
sciences
Students
University
2005 2006
New New
Scientific area Registered Graduated Registered Graduated
Admissions Admissions
Engineering,
Industry and 2242 134 336 2790 304 584
Construction
Agriculture 1071 126 142 1237 140 252
Health and
1115 47 254 1280 51 265
welfare
Services 775 143 301 794 83 285
Unspecified
… 243 … 764 201 589
areas
Sub-total 18,863 2,537 5,258 32,081 2,792 13,499
Source: Ministry of Education and Culture, Mozambique.
The Minister’s speech had public resonance and raised a controver-

sial debate on the role of social sciences for development in the country.
The speech had a number of implications, some of them “bizarre,” in-
cluding, for example, the introduction of scientifically ambiguous pro-
grammes christened “fight against poverty.” This shows how political
discourse and slogans can interfere with the academic environment that is
highly permeable. Studies of this form of political interference and the
relationship between academics and politics are still rare in Mozambique.
Criticising the inaugural lecture, the Mozambican sociologist, Macamo
(2005) said the following:
It takes a considerable amount of imagination to suppose that the exis-

tence of medical doctors, agronomists and professors necessarily im-
plies the successful struggle against disease, starvation and ignorance
(illiteracy). There is a deep gap separating these things, the topography
of which needs to be described. (Macamo 2005: 1)
Macamo argues that social science is, in fact, the discipline, which
rightfully claims the capacity to undertake a description of that topogra-
phy. When medical doctors, engineers, agronomists or even professors
are capable of doing so, it is because they receive subsidies from the so-
cial sciences.
The arguments and discourses, to which Macamo is reacting, have in-
filtrated the university at various levels. From the top management of the
university down to the departments and even the students, the mantra
“fight absolute poverty” reverberates. There are no studies that look at
how and why students choose their final mini-dissertation research topics;
262 Patrício Langa
the same is valid for academic staff and researchers. My own experience
as a lecturer has shown that commonly most students write about the so-
cial representation of HIV/AIDS and themes related to the fight against
poverty agenda. I presume that declaring the fight against absolute pov-
erty the ultimate objective of one’s research project makes a strong politi-
cally correct argument. This shows the extent to which the political dis-
course has come to permeate the university system and academia in Mo-
zambique.
If this is correct, it would be appropriate to warn against the “politics
of social engagement, legitimacy, and relevance” as represented in the
political discourse of the struggle against poverty that implicates the sub-
version of the university for political purpose, constraining academic
freedom and institutional autonomy. As I attempted to demonstrate with
the selected examples from the role of academics, the new law of higher
education and nomination of vice-chancellors, politics of relevance are
downplayed by the relevance of politics.
INCONCLUSIVE CONCLUSIONS
My claim in this paper is that academics are being confronted with ethi-
cal responsibilities rather than a research agenda. I distinguish between
“politics of scientific legitimacy and relevance” and “politics of social
engagement, legitimacy, and relevance.” I have argued that whereas the
former is compatible with the scientific determination of priorities con-
cerning social engagement by virtue of the fact that academics them-
selves set the agenda, the latter inevitably leads to the political determina-
tion of the priorities of public universities and academic ethical responsi-
bilities for political purposes. Some may argue that this is a radical posi-
tion; however, none of this is to say that the idea of socially engaged uni-
versities is either indisputably good or bad. The more conventional mod-
ern science still has a role to play in many places and is not without its
bright satanic virtues. There is, however, a mounting pressure to assume a
partisan position, supporting new kinds of science unequivocally against
usual science. In Mozambican higher education, there is no open forum
for discussions on issues such as university engagement and conventional
science, which has left academia more vulnerable to political meddling.
The subversion of the notion of socially engaged science entails that aca-
demics appear to be constrained in their ability to formulate issues in ob-
servation of academic criteria that for instance are related to poverty alle-
viation.
In concluding, I acknowledge that there remain a number of ques-

tions that strike me when I think of the invasion of academia by “poverty
fighters.” If we consider for instance, the assumption that it is possible to
eradicate absolute poverty as Jeffrey Sachs unpersuasively advocats, what
would academics do in a world without poverty? What if they could solve
all social problems, what would then be their next “honourable” cause for
social engagement? Would they return to conventional science, i.e. sci-
ence as the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake? Certainly, none of
these questions derives from a socially robust programme of the philoso-
phy of science. What is wrong if someone does not want to be a “poverty
fighter”? In fact, whichever model of science we choose to practice, one
thing can likely be agreed upon: universities face great exogenous pres-
sure and challenges in these times, not only in terms of the depth and
width of the questions they are expected to address, but in the dialectic of
what seems to be simultaneously greater public trust in science and
greater scepticism about its costs and benefits. However, I am not sure
whether socially engaged and robust science is the solution or part of the
problem.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
AIM. “Guebuza Stresses Education in Fight against Poverty.” 2008.

http://allafrica.com/stories/printable/200804251056.html (retrieved
April 26, 2008).
Ali, B. A. Os Desafios do Ensino Superior e da Universidade Eduardo
Mondlane no Desenvolvimento de Moçambique. Oração de
Sapiência. Ministério da Educação e Cultura, Maputo, Mozambique,
2005.
Alsácia, A. “Balance das Actividades do FNI: Promovendo a Educação
Ciêntífica e Desenvolvimento Tecnológico.” IIIo Conselho Coorde-
nador da Ciência e Tecnologia. Pequenos Libombos, August 6-8,
2008.
Beverwijk, J. The Genesis of a System: Coalition Formation in Mozambi-
can Higher Education, 1993-2005. Czech Republic: CHEPS/UT,
2005.
Boulton, G. and C. Lucas. “What are Universities For?” 2008.
http://www.leru.org (retrieved November 2008).
Castells, M. “University as Dynamic Systems of Contradictory Func-
tions.” In Challenges of Globalisation. South African Debates with
Manuel Castells, Vol. 4, edited by J. Muller, N. Cloete, and S. Badat,
264 Patrício Langa
pp. 206-223. Cape Town, South Africa: Maskew Miller Longman,

2001.
Clark, B. R. The Higher Education System: Academic Organization in
Cross-National Perspective. Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press, 1983.
Conceição, P., M. Heitor, and O. Oliveira. “Expectations for the Univer-
sity in Knowledge-based Economy.” Technological Forecasting and
Social Change 58 (1998): 203–214.
Drori, G. S., J. W. Meyer, O. F. Ramirez, and E. Schofer. 2003. Science
in the Modern World Polity: Institutionalization and Globalization.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2003.
Du Toit, A. “Institutional Autonomy, Academic Freedom and Public Ac-
countability. Towards Conceptual Clarification: A Thought Experi-
ment.” CHE Colloquium. Working Paper. University of Cape Town,
South Africa, 2006.
Elzinga, A. “The New Production of Particularism in Models relating to
Research Policy. A Critique of Mode 2 and Triple Helix.” 2002.
http://www.csi.ensmp.fr/WebCSI/4S/download_paper/download_pap
er.pdf. (retrieved February 2009).
Etwkowitz, H. and L. Leydesorf. “The Endless Transition: A ‘Triple He-
lix’ of University-Industry Government Relations. Introduction.” Mi-
nerva 34, no. 3(1998): 203–208.
Filimone, H. 2007. “Padre Filipe Couto: Um Reitor que já foi um Grande
Sapateiro.” Notícias, March 9, 2007, Maputo, Sexta-Feira.
http://www.clubofmozambique.com/solutions1/solutions/mozambiqu
e/personalities/Padre_Filipe_Couto.pdf (retrieved November 2008).
Gibbons, M. “Engagement as a Core Value in a Mode 2 Society.” Paper
Presented at the Community Engagement in Higher Education Con-
ference, September 3-5 2006, Cape Town, South Africa.
-----.“Engagement as a Core Value for the University: A Consultation
Document.” 2001.
http://www.acu.ac.uk/policyandresearch/research/engagement.pdf.
(retrieved April 26, 2008).
Gibbons, M., C. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartzman, P. Scott, and M.
Trow. The New Production of Knowledge: Dynamics of Science and
Research in Contemporary Societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Pub-
lications, 1994.
Glaser, J. “Limits of Change: Cognitive Restrains on ‘Postmodernization’
and the Political Redirection of Science.” Social Science Information
39, no. 3(2000): 439-465.
Gonçalves, A. C. P. “A Concepção de Politecnica em Moçambique:

Contradições de um Discurso Socialista (1983-1992).” Educação e
Pesquisa 33, no. 3(2007): 601-619.
Gumport, J. P. “Academic Restructuring: Organizational Change and
Institutional Imperatives.” Higher Education 39, no. 1(2000): 67-91.
Hall, M. 2008. “Community Engagement in South African Higher Educa-
tion.” NRF/CHE Workshop on Research on Community Engagement:
A Discussion Forum, CSIR Convention Centre, Pretoria, South Af-
rica, August 23, 2008.
Harding, A., A. Scott, S. Laske, and C. Burtscher, C., eds. Bright Satanic
Mills: Universities Regional Development and Knowledge Economy.
Hampshire, MA: Ashgate, 2007.
Kellermann, P. 2007. “The University as a Business? Social Division of
Labour and the Commodification of Knowledge and Science.” 2007.
http://www.euresearch.ch/fileadmin/documents/events2007/ESSRHA
07/Kellermann__Paul.pdf. (retrieved November 2008).
Langa, P. “De Novo a Nomeação de Reitores para Universidades
Publicas.” 2008.
http://www.circulodesociologia.blogspot.com/2008/08/ de-novo-
nomeao-de-reitores-para.html. (retrieved November 25, 2008).
-----.“Rogério Utui Sucede a Carlos Machili na UP.” 2007.
http://oficinadesociologia.blogspot.com/2007/02/cientistas-
emgajados-ou-desengajados-1.html. (retrieved April 26, 2008).
-----.“The Constitution of the Field of Higher Education Institutions in
Mozambique.” Master’s thesis. University of Cape Town, South Af-
rica, 2006.
Maassen, P. and N. Cloete. “Global Reform Trends in Higher Education.”
In Transformation in Higher Education: Global Pressures and Local
Realities, edited by N. Cloete, P. Maassen, R. Fehnel, T. Moja, T.
Gibbon, and H. Perold. Cape Town, South Africa: Juta, 2006.
Macamo, E. “Outros Tipos de Pobreza.” Working Paper. Maputo, Mo-
zambique, 2005.
Machel, S. A Classe Trabalhadora Deve Conquistar e Excercer o Poder
na Frente da Ciência e da Cultura. Maputo, Mozambique: Universi-
dade Eduardo Mondlane, 1976.
-----.1974a. Fazer da Escola a Base para o Povo Tomar o Poder. FRE-
LIMO. Carderno.n6 (Colecção Estudos Orientais).
-----.1974b. Estudemos e Façamos dos nossos Conhecimentos um
Instrumento de Libertação do Povo. Maputo, Mozambique: Depar-
tamento do Trabalho e Ideologia da Frelimo, n8 (Colecção Palavras
de Ordem).
266 Patrício Langa
MacGregor, K. “Africa: Relevance: Financial Support, Says E-Forum.”

2008a.
http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20081123
(retrieved November 24, 2008).
-----.“AFRICA: Researchers Lag in Science and Technology.” 2008b.
http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20081120
(retrieved November 25, 2008).
Mamdani, M. and M. Diouf, eds. Academic Freedom in Africa. Dakar,
Senegal: CODESRIA, 1994.
Mário, M., P. Fry, and A. Chilundo. Higher Education in Mozambique: A
Case Study. Oxford: James Currey, 2003.
Mayntz, R. “Socialist Academies of Sciences: The Enforced Orientation
of Basic Research at User Needs.” Research Policy 27 (1998): 781–
791.
“Padre Filipe Couto: O Homem do Presidente em frente da UEM.” Me-
diaFAX. Maputo, February 26, 2007, No3730.
MESCT. Nova Lei do Ensino Superior. Maputo. Republica de
Moçambique, 2003.
Mondlane, E. Lutar por Moçambique. Lisboa, Portugal: Sá da Costa,
1977.
Mouton, J. “Regional Report on Sub-Saharan Africa: Study on National
Research Systems. A Meta-review.” Presented at the Symposium on
Comparative Analysis of National Research Systems, January 16-18,
2008, UNESCO Headquarters in Paris, France.
Muller, J. “Responsiveness and Innovation in Higher Education.” Com-
missioned Paper: University of Cape Town, South Africa, 2001.
-----.Reclaiming Knowledge: Social Theory, Curriculum and Education
Policy. London: Routledge Falmer, 2000
Nowotny, H., P. Scott, and M. Gibbons. “‘Mode 2’ Revisited: The New Pro-
duction of Knowledge, Introduction.” 2003. http://www.
prescott.edu/faculty_staff/ faculty/scorey/documents/
NowotnyGibbons2003Mode2Revisited.pdf. (re-trieved: April 26, 2008).
Rip, A. “Cognitive Approach to Relevance of Science.” Social Science
Information, 36, no. 4(1997): 615- 640.
Rip, A. and B. J. R. Van Der Meulen. “The Post-modern Research Sys-
tem.” Science & Public Policy 23 (1996): 342-352.
Sachs, J. The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time. Lon-
don: Penguin, 2005.
Salter, L. “Science and Public Discourse. History of Intellectual Culture.”
2003.
http://www.ucalgary.ca/hic/website/2003vol3no1/articles/2003%20p
df/salterpdf.pdf (retrieved February 28, 2008).
Salter, L. Mandated Science: Science and Scientists in the Making of

Standards. Holland: Kluwer Academic Publications, 1988.
Serra. C. “Cientistas Sociais: Engajados ou Desengajados.” 2007a.
http://oficinadesociologia.blogspot.com/2007/02/cientistas-
emgajados-ou-desengajados-1.html (retrieved April 26, 2008).
-----.“Reitores: Endogenia, Eleições e Mandatos.” 2007b.
http://oficinadesociologia.blogspot.com/2007/02/reitores-endogenia-
eleies-e-mandatos.html (retrieved April 26, 2008).
Slaughter, S. and L. L. Leslie. Academic capitalism: Politics, Policies
and the Entrepreneurial University. Baltimore and London: John
Hopkins University Press, 1997.
Weiler, H. N. National Unification, Global Competition and Institutional
Reform: The Dynamics of Change in Higher Education. Cape Town,
South Africa: CHET, 2008.
Ziman, J. Real Science: What It Is, and What It Means. Cambridge and
New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
-----.“‘Postacademic Science’: Constructing Knowledge with Networks
and Norms.” Science Studies 9 (1996): 67–80.
268 Ifeanyi P. Onyeonoru
Challenges of Doing Sociology in a

Globalizing South: Between Indigenization
and Emergent Structures
Ifeanyi P. Onyeonoru, University of Ibadan, Nigeria 1
As sociology emerged from the womb of the industrial revolution in

Europe and the challenges of the anomic socio-economic environment,
the concern of its founding fathers naturally gravitated around Western
ideologies and challenges. The modernization paradigm facilitated the
hegemonic ascendancy of Western sociology in the South until the recent
ideological impasse, when the South began to grope for fresh insights.
Currently, attention is still being drawn to the sociological significance of
emancipation from systemic inequality created by social structural vari-
ables in the development process globally but particularly in poorer coun-
tries. This study, therefore, draws from Professor Peter Ekeh’s (1983)
“Colonialism and Social Structure” and his (1975) theoretical statement
on the two publics to highlight the consequences of uncritical engage-
ment in the Periphery with the sociology of the Core, the importance of
agency in post-imperialistic thinking in sociology, and the implications
for repositioning sociologists in the South for the task of a more creative
local engagement with globalizing ideologies that are integral to main-
stream sociology in the North. The paper also highlights the roles of in-
ternational, regional, and national associations such as the International
Sociological Association (ISA), the African Sociological Association
(AFSA), the Nigerian Sociological and Anthropological Association
(NASA), and the Council for the Development of Social Science Re-
search in Africa (CODESRIA) in setting the agenda.
1
Ifeanyi Onyeonoru is the Secretary General of the Nigerian Anthropological
and Sociological Association (NASA) and a member of the Department of Soci-
ology, University of Ibadan, Nigeria. He can be reached at
[email protected] or [email protected]
Challenges of Doing Sociology in a Globalizing South 269
INTRODUCTION
The development of sociology and anthropology in Nigeria can be di-

vided into three broad but related periods as follows: the colonial to im-
mediate pre-independence period, characterized by foreign domination
and utilization of academic research; the period of indigenization efforts
from 1959 to the 1980s; and the period of systemic crisis and neo-liberal
globalization from the 1980s onward. Many of the major works cited in
this paper were part of the proceedings from the first conference of the
Nigerian Anthropological and Sociological Association held in 1971.
The theme of the conference, “Sociology and Anthropology for Nigeria:
What For?” was a reflection of the concern among Nigerian scholars at
that time about the domestication of the discipline. Here I highlight the
works of anthropologists and sociologists that strove for the indigeniza-
tion of social scientific knowledge. I also reflect on the crisis period in
the Nigerian university system characterized by unwholesome expansion
beginning in the 1970s and the twin dictatorship of the market and the
military that paved way for a rather irresponsible state relationship with
the Nigerian academia within the framework of neo-liberal globalization -
what I regard as the second incorporation. Mention is also made of res-
cue attempts by a number of institutions, including NASA.
THE PERIOD OF FOREIGN DOMINATION OF

SCHOLARSHIP
The initial activities in sociology and anthropology in Nigeria were
founded on foreign interests and ideology as well as external experience.
Little or no effort was made to integrate borrowed knowledge with local
experience or generate indigenous theories that explained the post-
colonial African or Nigerian social structure. Hence, at the onset of so-
cial sciences in Nigeria, working in the area of sociology and anthropol-
ogy was characterized by foreign control of ideas and research. The
process was driven by colonial and imperial institutions and a number of
establishments including the Nigerian Institute of Economic and Social
Research which supported research scholars most of whom were expatri-
ates funded by charitable academic foundations with their own political
and economic agendas. The establishment of the Faculty of Economics
at the premier university in Nigeria - the University of Ibadan - did not
improve the situation, because it was headed by an Irish Professor who
had little regard for Nigerian scholars (Nzimiro 1971).
The pioneer anthropologists, in particular, worked as the intellectual

arm of the colonial masters. Some of them were establishment anthro-
pologist whose commitment to their work was to support the colonial
government so as to ensure the effective political domination of Nigeria.
For instance, such anthropologists guided numerous district officers who
wrote over two hundred intelligence reports on the Igbo people after the
1929-3 Women Riots. Since the above institute and its new faculty were
controlled by expatriate scholars, they made little or no intellectual con-
tribution to the changing Nigerian society (Nzimiro 1971). Their com-
mitment to Nigeria was marginal, since they concentrated on conducting
research, gathering materials, and going home to publish in journals
abroad, on the basis of which they were branded experts in particular Ni-
gerian tribes or aspects of a particular branch of social science (Otite
1971). Similar trends were observed in Australia (Connell 2007).
In the post-independence era, according to Nzimiro (1971), foreign
scholars funded by American foundations such as Rockefeller and Ford
whose allegiance was more to these benevolent donors became African-
ists (so-called) and lecturers in various American Universities, where
they established African centres in such places as Boston, UCLA, Co-
lumbia, Howard, Northwestern, and Wisconsin. In Nzimiro’s (1971)
words, “The field of studies that come within our discipline has been
dominated by these establishment scholars most of them serving the in-
terests of imperialist governments, but camouflaged as scientific objec-
tive studies” (4).
Otite (1971) similarly observed that in this process of academic
scrambling, social anthropologists carved out “territories” for themselves
through a glorification of exclusive symbols and relationships founded on
some kind of grand theories based on these symbols. The colonial system
of indirect rule tended to consolidate the socio-cultural units marked out
by these anthropological and quasi-anthropological investigations. Relat-
ing Western-dominated social science to imperialism, Ake (1971) stated,
“When Western scholars turned their attention to the study of Africa and
other Third World regions, they did so not by inventing new analytical
tools, but by using the tools already in vogue, especially those which
were conducive to the comparative study of Western countries and Third
World societies” (127).
While it is not necessary to assume a conspiracy to or consciousness
of serving imperialism among Western scholars working on Africa and
other parts of the Third World, the foregoing nevertheless suggests that
the practice of sociology and anthropology in the colonial period in Nige-
ria were rarely founded on a passion for the development of Nigerian so-
ciety but on an exogenous agenda designed to meet the hegemonic colo-
nial and imperial project motivated by the desire for external control of
the emergent Nigerian state.
THE INDIGENIZATION EFFORT
A couple of events that tended to modify the above scenario towards the
indigenization of sociological and anthropological work are noteworthy:
the founding of the Nigerian Economic Society in London in 1959 by
Nigerian scholars (including sociologists); the establishment of the Nige-
rian Journal of Economic and Social Studies (NJESS) that provided pub-
lication opportunities for Nigerian social scientists; and the founding of
the Nigerian Anthropological and Sociological Association (NASA) in
1971 and the Nigerian Journal of Sociology and Anthropology that
served as the publication outlet for sociologists and anthropologists in
Nigeria. As used above, “indigenization” broadly refers to the contextu-
alization of sociological theory and methods to account for the peculiari-
ties associated with neo-colonial structures and features of underdevel-
opment in non-Western societies like Africa. It implies a re-orientation
of sociological research towards the development of Africa through the
generation and application of endogenous concepts (not necessarily lan-
guage) to illuminate indigenous social reality. It involves an effort to
explain emergent social patterns in the neo-colonial situation, some of
which have no equivalent in the West. Emphasis is placed on a guarded
application of social theories and methods emanating from Western ex-
periences onto non-Western situations.
The above development provided a platform for a more indigenous
explanation of social reality in Nigeria. Prominent among these was
Akiwowo’s (1971) work titled “Contributions to the Sociology of Knowl-
edge From Oral Poetry.” The work stimulated debates on the issue of in-
digenous sociology (See Akiwowo 1971; 1983; 1986; Connell 2007;
Adesina 2000; Otite 2008). Indeed, in his presidential address to the First
Conference of NASA in 1971, Akiwowo emphasized the need for the utili-
zation of sociology for the development of Nigerian society, stating, among
other things, that NASA should give strong moral support to the develop-
ment of social indicators for the measurement of societal growth compara-
ble to the economic indicators used by economists (Akiwowo 1974). The
United Nations Development Programme accomplished this in the 1990s.
Professor Peter Ekeh, on his part, contended that there was a significant
distinction between civil society in Western society and that found in Africa.
He observed that unlike civil society in the West, which has one public
realm mediating between the state and the individual or the family, there is
no single public realm in Africa. Instead, the heritage of the post-colonial

social structure in Africa has produced a non-homogenous public realm
divisible into two: the civic public and the primordial public. Contrary to
the situation in Western society, where the public realm and the private
realm are defined by a common underlying societal morality, there is no
monolithic public realm in Africa enjoying common morality with the
private realm. Instead, the public realm is divided into two. One is a
primordial public within which the social behaviour of individuals is guided
by norms defined by societal morality and is therefore bound to the private
realm. The other is a civic public that is devoid of any claims to morality
and hence amoral. Colonial engagement with Africa, therefore, bred a
duality of moral perspectives in the new states, generating two broad
spheres of moral and amoral behaviour, as distinct from the moral and the
immoral typical of Europe.
It is, for instance, the institutionalization of amorality as a principle of
social existence in the colonial and neo-colonial state that may explain the
manipulation of ethnic groups by class identities in Africa – in the socio-
economic and political interests of the latter (Ekeh 1975; 1992; 1996). The
civic public is also the realm of contests for political, economic, and social
resources with competing ethnic groups, both at the collective and
interpersonal levels. In this sphere the moral content of competition is
considered insignificant and this tends to promote corruption at various
levels of society in Africa. Passing philosophies like “it depends,”
underpinned by a free rider attitude, tend to define the struggle for power
and wealth in the civic public realm. Hence, as Ekeh (1992) puts it:
There are in European nations single consolidated public realms, which

effectively offer common platforms for the activities of the state and the
public behaviors of individuals. Here on the contrary there is
segmentation of the public realm. There is a civic public realm over which
the state presides and over which the ordinary man (or woman) does not
feel that he is part-owner of this realm. When he is wronged in it he
withdraws from it to his own primordial public realm whose ownership he
asserts vigorously. (198)
Ekeh’s thesis on the two publics in Africa is enhanced by his position

on the nature of African social formation in colonialism. The first form is
the “transformed pre-colonial indigenous institutions.” These consist of
traditional structures, which in their transformed states operate within the
new meanings and symbols of colonialism and in a widened new socio-
cultural system and framework. Ekeh (1983) explains, “The moral and
social order which formally encased the pre-colonial indigenous institutions
is burst by the social forces of colonialism and they seek new anchors in the
changed milieu of colonialism” (11). Sometimes, such a transformation is
the product of a process of dynamic social adjustments in the emergent
plural and competitive social environment.
The second is “migrated social structure and constructs.” These are
Eurocentric institutions, models, principles, ideologies, and institutions that
were almost literally parcelled or imported wholesale from the imperial
West and uncritically grafted onto the new colonial situation. Bureaucracy,
rational organization, federalism, and the modern military are examples
(Ekeh 1983).
The third form is the “emergent social structures” which are neither
indigenous to Africa nor imported from outside. They are peculiar social
structures that developed from the space and time of colonialism, with a
logic of their own - distinct sociological entities with remarkable complexity.
Although they may have similarities in the West and elsewhere, these
emergent social structures have a logic all their own, and their peculiar
situation in colonialism marks them out as distinct political and sociological
structures, sometimes of baffling complexity. They grew with colonialism
and in colonialism; these emergent social structures are generated by
colonialism itself. They emerged to meet societal needs that indigenous
social structures and the migrated social structure could not fulfill in the new
colonial environment (Ekeh 1983).
Emergent structures present enormous explanatory challenges to
scholars engaging with neo-colonial Africa’s social formations. Unlike the
first two types of social formations in colonialism, emergent social
structures are difficult to discern for two major reasons. First, while the first
two represent formal aspects of the colonial and post-colonial situations, the
emergent social structures represent the informal elements of colonialism.
Second, "The emergent social structures are very often consciously smeared
with tradition or modernity, to give them the appearance of ultra-tradition or
ultra modernity" (Ekeh 1983: 20). An example of this is also the ethnic
group. Nigerian ethnic groups have their socio-political meaning only in
terms of the development of Nigeria. For our work, this has implications for
ethnic configurations and class composition; the shifting social boundaries
and coalitions constructed by primordial/ethnic groups and other plural
identities in Nigeria; the dynamics of class structuration of ethnicity and
conflicts; the social processes involved; as well as the nature of morality
thrown up. Ekeh's thesis on the two publics was put forward as a general
theoretical statement applicable to various social scientific analyses.
Meanwhile, two things are noteworthy from the foregoing. First is the
fact that social life in Africa is characteristic of Ekeh's emergent structures
and constructs. Second is the fact that the morality and loyalty of the
average African is rooted in the primordial public in contrast with the civic
public. According to Ekeh (1992):
In most of Africa, historically, the civic public was seen as the property of
the imperial European rulers. In the post colonial period, it is owned by
their successors - the soldiers and personal dictators who have ceased its
power. When a frustrated Nigerian exclaims, "Nigeria is not worth dying
for", he is complaining that he has no share in the control of the civic
public realm. But he would be ready to fight and die for his primordial
realm - which is managed and owned by his own ethnic group. (198)
The foregoing corroborates the Nzimiro’s (1971) observation that

every Nigerian traditional community is founded on the lineage structure
or the line of descent through which the individual derives his social at-
tachment. Nationality is, therefore, a structure that has grown from the
lowest descent unit, the clan and sub-clans, and emerged into a wider
group: a nationality, an ethnic group. Although the sizes of these nation-
alities vary, each nevertheless has cultural indices in common. Colonial
domination brought these nationalities together under the modern influ-
ence of European civilization. The new institutions of the colonial re-
gime exposed all Nigerians to new norms, values, and cultures of the
West. These new norms were generated by the new institutions –
political, economic, educational, and religious, - and these norms became
the new binding forces that brought all the ethnic nationalities together.
The colonial domination which brought Nigerians together under the
modern influence of European civilization also exposed them to the
values of new nationhood and impregnated them with the ideals, concepts,
and values of Western economics. Nigerians were taught to accept the
profit motive and the selling of labour power in the labour market, be it
the labour market controlled by voluntary agencies, by commercial
enterprises, or by government institutions. Nigerians came together
under these various economic institutions and worked under the
directions of the British, who controlled most of these institutions.
The complexity of what is described above has implications for doing
sociology in Nigeria: the Nigerian sociologist and anthropologist, the so-
cial scientist for that matter, should be committed to understanding the
dynamics of social changes related to the emergent social structure and
constructs in their society. They should pay less attention to marginal
research and investigating aspects of the society that are not intrinsically
vital to the development of the nation. This follows from Nzimiro’s ob-
servation that the pioneers of social science and sociology were men
committed to searching for solutions to the social problems of their coun-
tries. They were not just doing that out of intellectual curiosity alone.
They had a sense of history, and they influenced social change through
their ideas. They were both deeply involved in the affairs of their father-
land but, as social scientists, were also detached enough to analyze social
facts. There was no contradiction between their involvement and de-
tachment. There was no false idea of “objectivity” devoid of participa-
tion. Both were synonymous to them. As Nzimiro (1971) noted:
No social scientist of note can operate if he or she is ignorant of the

structure and functions of our society. This understanding is his first in-
tellectual weapon. He can understand it if he knows the structure and
functions of our traditional society before he can understand the intrica-
cies of the changing modern society. The tasks of the anthropologists
and sociologists are crucial, and here I must state that the sociologists
who limits himself to the understanding of the modern European socie-
ties without studying the social structure of our society in its traditional
setting has not yet completed the picture of his image of our society. It
becomes imperative that he must know both if he is to operate scientifi-
cally. (9-10)
The heterogeneity and complex nature of present African society in

its traditional setting, internal conflicts, and contradictions should attract
more endogenous investigation in focus and design that would not simply
impose functionalist regularities on the system. In Nigeria and much of
Africa, for instance, the functionalist consensus, order, and structuring of
the parts to sustain the whole are rarely applicable. More visible are so-
cial tensions and disorder associated with allegiance to ethnic and ethno-
religious groups to the detriment of the nation-state as well as primarily
self-interested political elites and the parasitic ruling classes, whose atti-
tudes are antithetical to the public interest. In all of this, the character of
the parts is in contradictory relation to the whole, suggesting difficulties
in the application of the Western-dominated sociological paradigm for
explaining and interpreting emergent structures in Africa. Given the lack
of explanations in the specific case of Nigeria, such trends have come
under the mythical term “the Nigerian Factor.” African social reality is
not quite the same as that of Europe, and this should inform the applica-
tion of classical sociological theory in the region. As Horowitz (1994)
observed in a related argument, the beauty of theory is the explanation of
specific events, while the curse of theory is the use of the same, over-
generalized explanations to interpret unlike events. Also important for
our discourse is Horowitz’s (1994) view that, “The function of sociologi-
cal theory, in contrast to ideological posturing, is to put into full view the
nature of the specific paradox that divides people along class, religious,
gender, racial and ethnic lines … to show the forces at work in moving a
specific paradox to resolution or dissolution” (185).
CRISIS OF THE 1980s AND BEYOND: TOWARD THE

SECOND INCORPORATION
Beginning in the 1970s, educational policy in Nigeria emphasized that the

greatest investment the nation could make for the development of its eco-
nomic, political, sociological, and human resources was in education.
The development of universities, therefore, followed the trajectory of
rapid expansion: government control of curricula, admissions quotas and
policies; free tuition and minimal other charges; and government domi-
nance of provision and funding of university education. To ensure firm
government control, a National Universities Commission (NUC) was es-
tablished in 1962 to regulate the establishment of new universities, dis-
tribute government grants to universities, and approve programmes.
By 1982 the number of universities had risen to 28, and student en-
rollment exceeded 120,000. This led to a dramatic increase in student
intake with a nearly 120% increase between the 1974/75 session and the
1979/80 session; the NUC on its part received less than 30% of its re-
quirement for the university system. Since this rapid expansion occurred
at a period of economic decline, it resulted in inadequate funding of the
universities (Onyeonoru 2000). The decline in funding became worse
over the years; 1996 and 1997 total recurrent grants were, for instance,
only half the levels of 1988. The effect on remuneration was frustrating
for academia, and it resulted in a brain drain, both internal and external.
By internal brain drain, I refer to the fact that the social reproduction of
sociologist was impeded by pull factors accounted for by better remu-
neration in the private, formal sector of the economy. First class gradu-
ates were drawn away from the university system to the corporate world
by better conditions of service, posing a problem for capacity-building
through mentorship. The second aspect of the brain drain had to do with
the out-migration of sociologists and other members of academia to the
West, America, and Southern Africa. This affected teaching and learning
standards in Nigerian universities.
In these circumstances, there was little systemic capacity for creative
work that could contribute or advance the initial effort at indigenization
of sociology or indeed doing sociology at any level. This was particu-
larly so with the constraints engendered by the non-availability of local
research grants and funds for conferences, both local and international.
External funding continued to reinforce the hegemonic scholarship of the

West and of the external funders. Atomization of research efforts and the
lack of databases for researchers and their work hampered opportunities
for collaborative scholarship, intellectual development, and the harness-
ing of synergies in the system.
The crisis period accounted for the moribund state in which NASA
found itself between 2000 and 2007. Of particular note was the ascen-
dancy of neo-liberal globalization within the framework of the twin dicta-
torship of the market and military rule. The state “rolled back” much of
its funding responsibility while increasing its administrative strangle hold
on the university system, denying the system autonomy and academic
freedom (Onyeonoru 2004). The likes of the World Bank and the Inter-
national Monetary Fund became the policy dictators, while sociologists
and other Nigerian scholars and their research findings were confined to
the four walls of the universities. Two parallel knowledge/policy tracks,
therefore, seemed to be in operation: one for academics derived from re-
search, the other, which informed policy in practice, for the government,
imposed by the World Bank and IMF. Benefits accruing from the mutual
relationship between town and gown were, therefore, compromised. The
situation has not really improved in the current dispensation.
Challenges facing teaching and learning sociology in Nigeria include
environmental, infrastructural (poor physical structures, poor librar-
ies/current teaching and learning materials, and the digital divide), and
due to embassy aggression (visa refusals). Several strikes embarked upon
by the university staff unions 2 to compel Nigerian governments to pay
adequate attention to the crumbling structures and poor remuneration of
university workers did not succeed in making the reward system a matter
of concern for the government. Given the struggles for economic sur-
vival, members could not meet their financial obligation to NASA until
the resuscitation effort by scholars in Ibadan in 2007.
The erratic power supply, though only one example of a wider infra-
structural problem in Nigeria, deserves special mention. Power genera-
tion in Nigeria has declined from 30.61 Kilowatts in 1996 to about 15.58
Kilowatts in 2007. This was grossly inadequate for the country’s more
than 140 million people. It translated to about 0.06 kilowatts of energy
consumption per million people behind Ghana’s 0.43 (International En-
ergy Agency 2007). 3 By 2009, power generation further declined to
about 10.00 Kilowatts (National Bureau of Statistics 2007). The frustra-
2
Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), Non-Academic Staff Union of
Universities (NASU), and Senior Staff Association of Nigerian Universities
(SSANU).
3
See http://www.eia.doe.gov/.
tions arising from this scenario have negatively affected teaching and re-
search. Electricity, water, telephone lines, and Internet access all raise
productivity, but they are also severely inadequate in Sub-Saharan Africa
(World Bank 2009).
A combination of emphasis on the private sector within the frame-
work of neoliberal economic globalization and the poor state of infra-
structure in public universities in Nigeria tend to make private universi-
ties the preference of the elite class. The issue of quality assurance is
however, a major concern.
Meanwhile, on the issue of the digital divide, it is noteworthy that in
six short years (1992-1998), the number of Internet host computers
worldwide increased from less than 1 million to almost 30 million. But,
the core of the information society still resides in the developed countries.
For instance, one quarter of American households use the Internet on a
daily basis (less than one-tenth of academics do in Nigeria), and more
than half of all Internet users live in the United States or Canada. The
information revolution has not gained a foothold in most developing
countries, including Nigeria, because they lack the basic infrastructure:
phone lines, electricity, and literacy. The digital divide between people
who are Internet-empowered and those who are not is wide and real. 4
A most critical issue for Internet access in Africa is the poor infra-
structure and ridiculous bandwidths in a large portion of countries. The
number of African Internet users is somewhere between 1.5 to 2 million
out of a continental population of about 750 million, and most of these
(about 1.5 million) reside in South Africa. As of 2002 in Africa each
computer with an Internet or e-mail connection usually supports between
3 and 5 users. This puts the number of users of Internet in Africa at
around 5-8 million. The figures represent about one user to every 250-
400 people compared to a world average of about one use for every 15
people and a North American and European average of about one in
every 2 people. Internet in Africa is characterized by low connectivity
density and very little local or indigenous African content, even among
institutional users who have direct Internet access. Even when they have
access to email, government ministries and research centers rarely have
web sites; where Internet is used, email predominates, or websites with
relatively poor contents and education. Sciences and community devel-
opment sites have the least content. 5 The low Internet support relates
with the fact that many university teachers and researchers from the
South utilize Yahoo email, which is often treated as “insecure” and hence
4
See http://www1.worldbank.org/devoutreach/spring00/article.asp.
5
See http://demiurge.wn.apcorg/africa/afstat.htm
not accepted by several websites in the North. This also limits the rate of
international interaction by Southern scholars, with implication for exclu-
sion. The above situation has negatively impacted the level of scientific
production (Nwagwu 2005) and visibility of African scholars in the
global scientific community.
STABILIZING EFFORTS: CODESRIA, AFSA, AND NASA
The Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa

(CODESRIA) has been at the vanguard of capacity building among Afri-
can intellectuals. This is evident in the following programmes of the
Council: the Multinational Working Group (MWG) on Youth and Iden-
tity; the Transnational Working group (TWG) on Africa and its Diasporas;
future research in collaboration with the African Futures Institute; South-
South Comparative Research Workshops; National Working Groups
(NWG); Programmes on Gender, Humanities, and Transnationalism;
Comparative Research Networks and Working Groups; and South-South
Research Collaboration.
The magnitude of the capacity building challenge for teaching and
learning in Africa is reflected in CODESRIA’s observation in 2006, with
reference to its TWG, that only a few of the proposals came from schol-
ars residing in Africa and even fewer from second, third, and fourth gen-
eration diasporan Africans. Thus a conscious attempt was made to enrich
the composition of the group with researchers drawn from both recent
and distant African diasporas around the world (including Asia, Melane-
sia and Polynesia, Australia, Latin America, the Caribbean, the Middle
East, Europe, and North America. 6
The African Sociological Association (AFSA) had its debut confer-
ence on July 15-18, 2007 at Rhodes University in Grahamstown-iRhini,
South Africa. The theme, “Sociology: the African Challenge,” was a re-
flection of the concern to make sociology in Africa relevant to regional
needs. The conference witnessed the participation of a large number of
African scholars. The association has been very active, among others, in
providing information on opportunities for capacity building for African
academics.
6
See http://www.codesria.org/Links/Home/annual_report06.
CONCLUSION
Doing sociology in Nigeria has passed through various challenging peri-

ods. Currently, the most pressing challenge for sociologists in Nigeria,
and indeed Africa, is to develop a critical capacity not only for explaining
and interpreting African social reality, enhanced by endogenous models
that capture the nature of the paradox and tensions in the emergent social
structure, but also the character of agency thrown up by such a process.
To achieve this, we need a paradigm shift, perhaps towards the sociology
of everyday life. These pose a challenge for NASA and AFSA as profes-
sional associations.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adesina, J. O. “Sociology and Yoruba Studies: Epistemic Intervention or

Doing Sociology in the ‘Vernacular’?” Journal of the Nigerian An-
thropological and Sociological Association, Special Edition (2000).
Ake, C. Social Science as Imperialism: The Theory of Political Devel-
opment. 2nd ed. Ibadan: Ibadan University Press, 1972.
Akiwowo, A. “Presidential Address: Association for What?” The Nige-
rian Journal of Sociology and Anthropology 1, no. 1 (1974).
-----. “Ajobi and Ajogbe: Variations on the Theme of Sociation.” Inau-
gural Lecture Series 48. Ife: University of Ife Press, 1983.
-----. “Contributions to the Sociology of Knowledge From an African
Oral Poetry.” International Sociology 1, no. 4 (1986).
Social Science. London: Allen and Unwin, 2007.
Ekeh, P. P. “Colonialism and the Two Publics in Africa: A Theoretical
Statement.” Comparative Studies of Society and History 17, no. 1
(1975).
-----. “Colonialism and Social Structure: Inaugural Lecture at the Univer-
sity of Ibadan.” Ibadan: University of Ibadan Press, 1983.
-----. “The Constitution of Civil Society in African History and Politics.”
In Democratic Transition in Africa, edited by B. Caron, A. Gboyega
and E. Osaghae. CREDU Documents in Social Sciences and Humani-
ties, 1992.
-----. “Political Minorities and Historically-Dominant Minorities in Nige-
rian History and Politics.” In Governance and Development in Nige-
ria: Essays in Honour of Professor Billy J. Dudley, edited by O.
Oyediran. Ibadan: Agbo Areo Publishers, 1996.
Horowitz, L. L. The Decomposition of Sociology. New York: Oxford

International Energy Agency. World Energy Outlook 2007: China and
India Insights. Paris: OECD/International Energy Agency, 2007.
National Bureau of Statistics. National Accounts of Nigeria 1981-2006.
Abuja: National Bureau of Statistics, 2007.
Nwagwu W.E.E. “The Open Access Movement: Interrogating I.T.’s Po-
tentials for Inserting Africa in the Global Scientific Information
Chain.” Ibadan Journal of the Social Sciences 3, no. 1 (2005).
Nzimiro, I. "The Social Scientists and the Challenge of our Civilization."
Paper Presented at the First Annual Conference of the Nigerian An-
thropological and Sociological Association, ABU, Zaria, December
16-18, 1971.
Onyeonoru, I. “The Nature and Management of Students’ Conflicts in
Nigerian Tertiary Institutions.” Annals of the Social Science Acad-
emy of Nigeria 12 (Jan-Dec 2000).
-----. “University Autonomy and Cost Recovery Policies: Union Contesta-
tion and Sustainable University System.” Paris: UNESCO, 2004.
Otite, O. “Anthropological Responsibilities in Nigeria.” Paper Presented
at the First Annual Conference of the Nigerian Anthropological and
Sociological Association, ABU, Zaria, December 16-18, 1971.
-----. “Four Decades of Sociology in Nigeria.” Keynote Address Pre-
sented at Conference to Celebrate Four Decades of Sociology, Fac-
ulty of the Social Sciences, University of Ibadan, Nigeria, October 16,
2008.
World Bank. World Development Report 2009: Reshaping Economic
Geography. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2009.
282 Abdul-Mumin Sa’ad
Globalization, Sociological Research, and

Public Policy in Nigeria: A Critical Analysis
of the Relevance of Socio-Legal Research to
the Development Needs of Nigeria
Abdul-Mumin Sa’ad, University of Maiduguri, Nigeria 1
Globalization as a process and phenomenon remains an issue whose dis-

cussion is entangled in its own complexity and in the controversy gener-
ated by the widely polarized positions held in regard to it. For this reason,
this paper will examine the concept by looking at some “myths” about the
concept. Here, myth is defined as a collection of stories or ideas we use
to understand and interpret our life-worlds. These stories and ideas do
influence, on the one hand, the kinds of research we do as scientists (so-
cial and/or natural), and, on the other hand, the kind of policies that are
rolled out by governments. Again, these public/government policies may
be informed by scientific research being conducted or may not at all. The
position of this paper is that because of the myth of globalization, the
government and the public tend to perceive some disciplines as more im-
portant and relevant than others, especially with regards to their contribu-
tions to a nation’s development. Contrary to that myth, this paper dem-
onstrates the relevance of socio-legal research to development in a Third
World nation such as Nigeria.
WHAT IS GLOBALIZATION?
The concept globalization, both as a process and phenomenon, is better

understood now than in the 1980s. However, the concept still remains an
issue whose discussion is entangled in its own complexity and in the con-
troversy generated by the widely polarized positions held in regard to it.
For this reason, we feel the concept can better be understood by looking
1
Abdul Mumin-Sa’ad is a Professor of Sociology (Criminology) in the Depart-
ment of Sociology and Anthropology at the University of Maiduguri, Borno
State, Nigeria, and he is a member of NALC. He can be reached at
[email protected].
Globalization, Sociological Research, and Public Policy in Nigeria 283
at some “myths” about it. Myth here does not refer to an untruth or a
simple fiction. Rather, the myth of globalization, like any other myth, is
a collection of stories or ideas we use to understand and interpret our life-
worlds. Myths are therefore as much about the present as they are about
the past and the future. Through repeated re-telling of stories, the imagi-
nation of each storyteller adds its own distinctive shade, each story be-
coming a history of its perpetual formation and deformation as each teller
imbues the story with his or her own language of the ideal and the real.
First Myth of Globalization: The “Radical Rupture”
Globalization is considered part of the postmodern era, and one theme

that runs through almost all postmodernist theorizing is the declaration of
a radical rupture or break between modernism and postmodernism. The
irony here, of course, is that modernity also saw itself as a radical break:
the processes of industrialization and the machine age replacing and
transforming all previous modes of production. In this sense, postmoder-
nity can be viewed as a disruptive child that has renounced its parents,
modernity.
At this stage, we can argue that a death-drive haunts and motivates
postmodern and/or globalization theory: a denial of the past, of the paren-
tal and the symbolic, in favour of forcing onto the world a new symbolic
code. Here, as rightly observed by Adams (2002), postmodern and glob-
alization theory are part of a wider current in Western philosophy that
privilege death over birth. The privilege accorded to death, according to
Adams, is part of “the encoded fear of non-existence, of nothingness after
the end, and the desire for mastery and control over the inevitable” (14).
Second Myth of Globalization: “The Transformative Power of ICTs”
Today, we are being made to believe that Information and Communica-

tion Technologies (ICTs) will transform the world and make it a better
place through instant communication across spaces, times, and cultures
over the Internet. We are told that we live increasingly in a “network so-
ciety” and that the winners in this society are the semiotic workers who
decipher the information flows to the masses and make life easier for all.
This is a myth in the sense that evidence from the developed countries,
especially the West and America, indicates exactly the contrary. Just as
building new roads tends to lead to new traffic jams, as computers and
information networks have increased in power, the pressure and stress of
the workplace has increased; the pressure to multitask in order to handle
all the data flows increases. In other words, far from being inherently
transformative, advancement in ICTs is increasingly used to legitimate

and reinforce market capitalism and new variants of wage slavery.
To expose this mythic dimension of technology is not to deny that
new technologies do have some transformative power, but rather, simply,
to assess critically the idea that technology is inherently transformative.
In short, just like all other inventions of ICTs throughout history (paper,
the printing press, the radio), new technologies can be liberating and
transformative as much as they can become the instrument of oppression,
domination, and propaganda.
Third Myth of Globalization: “The End of the Nation State”
Undoubtedly, the world economy today is dominated by market forces

and transnational corporations that have no consideration for the sover-
eignty of nation-states, national economies, national cultures, or territorial
borders. In other words, transnational corporations increasingly relocate
anywhere in the world in order to gain market advantage, without loyalty
to their country of origin. This “flow” and “flexible mobility” is believed
to be due to technological advances, which are supposedly in the interest
of all, irrespective of nation-states. The myth here is the failure to
recognize imperial power as it rears its ugly head again; factories of
production may be located in so-called developing nations, yet the
financial gains continue to be circulated via the economies of the
developed world. The money market operates through and for the benefit
of rich countries or through the country whose currency is used as the
international reserve currency.
Fourth Myth of Globalization: “Competition”
The myth here is the idea that the “liberalization” of markets and the
wonders of “free trade” are responsible for the phenomenon of globaliza-
tion. On the contrary, however, subsidies are increased to the maximum
to protect Western agriculture and industry, while the old command or
order to continue to open up markets to imports is sent out to the develop-
ing countries. Closely linked to this myth are the importations of such
concepts as “good governance,” “liberalization,” and “democratization.”
On the surface, these concepts reverberate as good ideas. The object ap-
pears to be about how to get Africa or the African leaders to stop the en-
demic corruption at all levels of society; to involve civil society in the
democratic process; to stop the orgies of violence that have become part
of daily life on the continent; not to engage in self-destruction; and so on.
However, without a critical approach to these issues we are at risk of be-
lieving the myth that though the developed world/West has introduced
the concepts, we can make them meaningful to our situation and radical-
ize them, which then prevent us from making the connection between the
rhetoric of good governance, liberalization, and democratization and the
need to penetrate largely untapped African markets.
Undoubtedly, it is very good to promote good governance and
democratization, but we also need to ask how serious its promoters are,
given the fact that key national services and institutions have been eroded
and undermined by market forces, that the employed and marginally em-
ployed worker is expected to work for 12 hours or more a day for a mis-
erly amount, and that the presence of minimum wage and trade unions is
seen as unfavorable to potential investors.
Fifth Myth of Globalization: “The Erosion of Local Cultures”
One of the most popular myths of globalization is that Western or Ameri-

can cultural is increasingly homogenizing the experience of the rest of the
world. The so-called “McDonaldization effect” means that the American
consumer can travel wherever she or he wants and not feel too far from
home. She or he can eat burgers, drink Coca Cola, and remain semi-
immersed within the same brand environment (Nike, Tommy Hilfiger,
etc.). While McDonaldization is undoubtedly taking place, we must also
know that the relationship between the global and the local involve more
complex processes. While so-called global culture is having an impact
on the local, the local is also appropriating global culture in its own pecu-
liar ways. In other words, the global is in fact very many syntheses of
different forms of locality. In short, the global is an abstract concept that
doesn’t exist in reality anywhere, whereas the local is concrete and exis-
tent. In the African village, one finds, for example, an American product:
Coca Cola. Here, the “global brand” is in reality a miniature of American
culture set afloat from its origins, and in this African village the Coca
Cola drink will not have the same cultural meanings it has in America.
What is therefore missing in the globalization-homogenization thesis is
the power of places, which are not simply physical locations but also con-
figurations of language, need, aspirations, desires, and a set of moral
boundaries. Global flows do have the ability to modify these configura-
tions, but it is equally true that local places themselves have the ability to
reconfigure the global flows.
THE RELEVANCE OF SOCIO-LEGAL RESEARCH TO

THE DEVELOPMENT NEEDS OF NIGERIA
It is common knowledge that among the disciplines being taught in Nige-

rian universities, some are regarded as more relevant than others by the
government to the development needs of the country. The various myths
of globalization discussed above are partly responsible for this prevailing
situation. Generally, the entire set of natural and physical sciences are
considered more relevant than all the arts, the humanities, and the social
sciences. More specifically, among natural and physical sciences, medi-
cine is regarded as the most important and relevant. Among the arts, hu-
manities and social sciences, law is regarded as the most relevant. In fact,
the government does not even consider political science, which is more
directly concerned with the institution of government, relevant to devel-
opment needs of Nigeria, and much less other social science disciplines
like sociology and sociology of law, which is “just” a branch of the latter.
The immediate past president of Nigeria, Olusegun Obasanjo, once stated
publicly that courses such as sociology should not be taught in our educa-
tional institutions. Such disciplines are branded “rhetoric,” “academia,”
“theories” or “inexperience” (Usman 1979). Thus, if we keep screening
the various disciplines being taught in our universities in Nigeria, we
shall in the end find that most of them are considered to be irrelevant or
not so relevant to development needs of the nation. This is why these
days a student is more likely to receive government sponsorship to study
medicine than social sciences such as sociology and political science.
If one reflects upon the prevailing situation in Nigeria in terms of the
so-called globalization thesis, it will appear neither strange nor miracu-
lous that both the government and the lay person have this unfortunate
conception. The importance of the natural and physical sciences like
medicine and engineering and disciplines like law, accounting, and eco-
nomics can be seen clearly by almost everybody, because their so-called
important contributions to development appear obvious, since they are in
material form. We so value human medicine, because we value our lives,
to which we feel only diseases and injuries constitute threats. Therefore,
we think human medicine alone will reduce the probability of these
things causing an untimely loss of our lives. We value engineering be-
cause we so value and need houses, cars/lorries, ships, trains, planes, ex-
press roads, rails, bridges, tall buildings, electric power, atomic and nu-
clear power, and so on.
We value accounting and economics as disciplines, because we value
money and wealth. We value law as relevant to Nigerian development
needs, because we value social order as an important element for devel-
opment. So, like Comte, the government and people of Nigeria see soci-
ety as both “static” and “dynamic” (Coser 1971: 23-24), which are actu-
ally incompatible. It is therefore not terribly surprising if a discipline like
the sociology of law, whose contribution is not in material terms, is con-
ceived of as irrelevant to the development needs of Nigeria. In fact, the
sociology of law is even conceived of as a threat to law, which, to the
government, is an instrument of social order concomitant with the
nation’s development. However, rather than destroying the law,
sociology in general and the sociology of law in particular aid the law. In
the analysis of crime and delinquency, for example, the juvenile courts in
the United States have long recognized that unaided by such disciplines
like biology, sociology (including sociology of law) and psychology, the
law is incompetent to decide what is the adequate treatment (Steward
1978: 11).
Actually, the importance of disciplines like the sociology of law is
not easily observed by people, because their contributions to national de-
velopment are not material but social. Unlike the law, their emphasis is
not social order as such, which human nature tends to cherish but which
is not necessarily the essential element for progress or development.
However, if we have a wider understanding of development which goes
beyond the material, then the sociology of law is very relevant to the de-
velopment needs of any society especially Nigeria. At this juncture we
need to pose such questions as: What is development? Why development?
Development for whom? To truly do justice to these questions even pe-
ripherally, we shall hear ourselves answering thus: Development means
advancement in both material and social conditions of human beings. We
should promote development so that we are free from all problems – so-
cial, political, cultural, and material. A viable development of a nation
should be reflected in every citizen of the nation or the country. So, for
the government to think that such disciplines like the arts, humanities
(other than the law), and social sciences (including the sociology of law)
are irrelevant to the nation’s development because they are not materially
oriented is for it to say that development is essentially material, which is
false. It also tantamount to a bundle of contradictions to the first three
and last of Nigeria’s five national objectives, which are basically not eco-
nomic, yet the government itself saw them as worthy of doing. 2 Again,
one would ask, is it surprising for a government such as that of Nigeria’s
2
The five national objectives are: i) a free and democratic society; ii) a just and
egalitarian society; iii) a united, strong, and self-reliant nation; iv) a great and
dynamic economy, and v) a land of bright and full opportunities for all citizens
(Federal Republic of Nigeria 1977: 4).
to contradict itself? After all, contradictions are characteristic of a capi-

talist socio-political order.
To the extent that it is obvious that development is never complete
and viable if it is only material and not also social, the sociology of law,
whose contributions to the nation’s development are socio-legal, is as
important as any discipline being taught in Nigerian universities, as we
are going to substantiate below. In the rest of the paper, we demonstrate
the relevance of the sociology of law to the development of Nigeria
through various socio-legal research approaches and methods. But, to
begin with, we are going to give a brief definition of the sociology of law
in terms of its tasks, since it is from its tasks that we shall be able to see
its relevance to the development needs of any society that is ready, unlike
Nigeria, to make use of the discipline. Podgorekki (1974) defined the
task of the sociology of law as follows: “Its task is not only to register,
formulate, and verify the general interrelations existing between the law
and other social factors (law could then be viewed as an independent or
dependent variable), but also to try and build a general theory to explain
social process in which the law is involved and in this way link this disci-
pline with the bulk of social control” (32).
The sociology of law is a discipline more recent in origin than sociol-
ogy, to which it constitutes an essential branch. This lag in the develop-
ment of the sociology of law was mainly because of the conflict between
sociology and jurisprudence, which was the result of narrowness and ab-
errations in the conception of the object and methods of the respective
disciplines (law and sociology). But, by the development of both sociol-
ogy and jurisprudence, sociology and law have finally met, and the meet-
ing place is the sociology of law (Gurvitch 1973: 1-2). Since then, soci-
ology of law has developed through three consecutive stages, namely: the
problematic stage; the empirical stage; and the engagement in policy-
making stage (Podgorekki 1974: 261). This last stage that the discipline
has reached makes it all the more important and very relevant to the de-
velopment needs of any nation. At this last stage the sociology of law is
not speculative or philosophical. It is scientific and empirical. It em-
ploys various social scientific and empirical methods to discover regulari-
ties in law and society and translate them into the language of concrete
advice. In other words, it uses social scientific methods to make func-
tional studies of law, of legal mechanisms, of social causes of legal rules,
of the divergence between laws and their administration, of the effects of
legal rules, and comparing the law and mores and practice of a society.
With the above studies, the sociology of law will therefore be able to pro-
vide policy makers with concrete advice on the social consequences of
legal rules; the general understanding of how different kinds of legal sys-
tems work; the enforceability of legal rules, etc. All these, to be sure,
will be very useful indeed to the development needs of a nation socio-
legally if the nation is willing to use the fruitful knowledge accruing from
sociology of law just as it is willing to use knowledge accruing from
medicine, engineering, and other natural and physical sciences.
SOCIOL-LEGAL RESEARCH, PUBLIC POLICY, AND

THE DEVELOPMENT NEEDS OF NIGERIA
Now let us see how sociology of law is relevant to the development needs
of a nation like Nigeria by the discoveries it makes or can make through
the various scientific methods at hand like historical-descriptive methods,
ethnographic-comparative methods, methods for e analysis of legal mate-
rials, experimental methods, and survey methods.
The Historical Descriptive Method
In the sociology of law, the historical method assumes the diachronic ap-
proach in research, reaching back into the past. Traditionally, when ap-
plied to law, the method was supposed to describe this or that legal en-
actment, statute, or institution in its unique historical perspective. The
modern version tries to compare types of social systems and the legal sys-
tems corresponding to them. This new version offers a far-reaching theo-
retical perspective and makes clear the fact that there are not only “tech-
nical innovations” but also “social innovations” (i.e., legal ideas and con-
structs). Thus, some nations adopt legal systems just as they adopt tech-
nologies, because they are needed; they are functional and in accord with
new socio-economic trends. Through this method, therefore, the sociol-
ogy of law will lead us to better understanding of the direction of and rea-
sons for the flow of legal innovations and the unexpected by-product of
these exchanges (Podgorekki 1974: 33-34). Undoubtedly, therefore, this
method, if properly applied to the Nigerian situation by socio-legal schol-
ars, will help in discerning or discovering the negative by-product of the
English legal system imposed upon the country by the colonialists and
discard them immediately. This will also help the nation to adopt a new
legal system based on real principles of need. Thus, Nigeria will not
adopt the legal system of a country such as the US simply because it
wants to “develop” like the US.
The Ethnographic Comparative Method
This method has been useful in identifying the limited validity of a gen-
eralized definition of law (i.e., there is hardly any single definition that
applies to all societies) and its limited influence on human behavior
(Podgorekki 1974: 35-36). With regard to the latter, it can also contribute
to the development of Nigeria socio-legally and economically if policy
makers are ready to consider this definition and repeal laws that are inef-
fective. This will help to reduce unnecessary costs and also to avoid the
creation of secondary crimes, criminal self-images, and criminal subcul-
tures in the country. This is because there are limits to what one can do
with the law, since it has been found that the main source of social con-
trol is internalized group norms and interpersonal pressures, rather than
formal regulatory forms. Arguments to substantiate this are: 1) there are
extreme difficulties in maintaining control in interpersonal relations
through law. For example, only diplomacy, economic aid, and bargain-
ing are used. 2) In the area of commercial contacts, it appears most par-
ties prefer settling disputes through other means. As rightly noted by
Aubert (1969), “You can settle a dispute [better] if you keep the lawyers
and accountants out of it” (200). 3) The pain-pleasure penal principle is
inadequate. The death penalty for armed robbery in Nigeria, for example,
does not seem to reduce the rate of armed robbery in any way. This ade-
quately substantiates the socio-legal argument that “if mores are adequate,
law is effective, if inadequate law is ineffective” (Podgorekki 1974: 13).
4) Crimes known as “victimless,” such as abortion, gambling, drug abuse,
adultery/fornication, etc., are created by laws that are designed to affect
or enforce private morality. 5) Two types of laws in particular have
failed: i) those that are used as means of providing social services in the
absence of other public agencies, such as the family non-support laws to
assist a needy family in obtaining support from a deserting spouse, and ii)
those that are used as a disingenuous means of permitting the police to do
what the law forbids them to do directly, such as disorderly-conduct and
vagrancy laws. While the behaviors that most of these laws are trying to
affect are due to poverty, they make it appear as if poverty itself is a
crime.
It need not be overemphasized that the above socio-legal problems
constitute a hitch to the development of Nigeria. That the problems could
have been avoided if the importance of socio-legal studies and research
was recognized early enough by the government and citizens of Nigeria
and a large turn over of graduates in socio-legal studies from universities
into the public services had been encouraged. Nigeria would have real-
ized early enough that the law is futile in bringing about certain changes
in society and therefore should be limited: that it should not interfere in

the private life of the individual; that it cannot be effective in stopping
social problems which are not its creations but the creation of the prevail-
ing social, political, and economic orders in the country; that although
law can be used as an instrument of change, there are conditions under
which that is the case (Aubert 1969: 96); and that such conditions should
therefore be discovered to guide more rational social and legal policies.
Could all these be said to be unimportant and irrelevant to the develop-
ment needs of Nigeria?
The Method for Analysis of Legal Materials
The method for analysis of legal materials that is utilized by socio-legal

scholars also reveals very fruitful empirical information about the legal
systems that a nation like Nigeria needs if it is to develop socio-legally.
This method analyzes materials that are stored in legal documents. Such
materials are usually indicators of legal behaviors that are possible or that
in fact took place. Since what really counts in socio-legal studies is the
legal behavior itself, this method is very valuable (Podgorekki 1974: 38).
In Nigeria, for example, one needs only to visit one of the magistrate’s
courts in action for a day or two without even analyzing materials stored
in legal documents to understand that the magistrate court system in Ni-
geria is unfamiliar to most plaintiffs. 3
It is no wonder, therefore, that many people in Nigeria appear to
prefer settling disputes amongst themselves at homes, and when they
have to go to court at all, as much as possible they avoid the English type
of courts in favor of customary and alkali (Shari’a) Courts (Sa’ad 1994;
1991; 1988; Ajomo and Okagbue 1990). Undoubtedly, therefore,
through analyses of legal materials, socio-legal scholars can illuminate
the need for overhauling our court procedures and actions so that every
Nigerian can feel at home in the court and thus become encouraged to
turn to the law for protection of their interests. But, at the moment, Nige-
rians believe winning or losing a case depends only on whether you have
a good or bad lawyer (Sa’ad 1994; 1988; 1991; Ajomo and Okagbue
1990). In other words, Nigerians do not see justice prevailing in the Eng-
lish type of courts, but then, as rightly pointed out by Aubert (1960), “It is
3
Several socio-legal studies employing analysis of legal materials were con-
ducted in Nigeria, and they revealed serious injustices in the English legal sys-
tem operating in the country, especially on the masses of Nigerians. This is due
primarily to this system’s economically, politically, and socio-culturally foreign
nature. See for examples, Sa’ad (1994; 1991; 1988) and Ajomo and Okagbue
(1990).
in the offer of justice that the legal system makes its major output in ex-
change for the input of motivation to accept the court as a problem solv-
ing structure” (20).
The Experimental Method
This method can also be used by socio-legal scholars to support the de-
velopment needs of Nigeria. It can be used, for example, “To study the
law in force because of the binding value of equality before the law”
(Podgorekki 1974: 40). Through this method, we can ensure that the
laws about to be introduced and enforced really reflect and protect the
interest of the larger society, rather than those of the few that make the
law. This is particularly important in Nigeria, where legislators, judges,
lawyers, prosecutors, and administrators of laws themselves are among
the elite groups of society, and the laws are always imposed rather than
experimentally tested before adoption. Given that law actually creates
and elaborates on the rights and duties conferred on the various members
of the society, there is no doubt that the law in Nigeria supports and
maintains the status-quo, i.e., the unjust and non-egalitarian social and
politico-economic order. Friedman (1979) means the same thing when he
asserts, “Law is not a strong, independent force but responds to outside
pressure in such a way as to reflect the wishes and powers of those social
forces which are exerting the pressure” (4).
The Survey Method
Some laws are accepted completely and internalized, and they guide the
behaviors of the individual. Some are accepted but not so strongly and
internalized to convince people to behave in line with the law. Finally,
some laws are only superficially and hypocritically accepted, so the indi-
vidual behaves in such a way as to make people believe that she or he
accepts the law but internally she or he does not (Podgorekki 1974: 40).
Socio-legal scholars can, through the use of survey questionnaires and
interviews, empirically distinguish between these laws in any given soci-
ety. 4 Surely, this must be very important and relevant to any nation
which truly aspires toward “a just and egalitarian society; a free and de-
mocratic society,” knowing fully that acceptance of the law makes the
law more binding and justifiable in society than just imposing it upon an
4
I have conducted two such studies in Nigeria. The first study was on the Kilba,
Mumuye, and Jukun in Adamawa and Taraba States (Sa’ad 1988: 157-226). The
second was on the Gwoza Hills Dwellers of Borno State (Sa’ad 1994: 93-103).
unwilling populace. And, for those who are more concerned about mone-
tary value, this is still very important because acceptance of law reduces
the cost of law enforcement.
One can go on and on demonstrating the importance and relevance of
socio-legal research to the development needs of Nigeria enough to fill a
full textbook. Clearly therefore, if a discipline like the sociology of law
is regarded as less important and relevant than the natural and physical
sciences or professions like law and accounting, which is far from being
true, there must be underlying reasons for such misconceptions, espe-
cially in Nigeria. We have either explicitly or implicitly sought to bring
these out clearly above. Some of these underlying reasons are discussed
more clearly in the next section of this paper, with a view to offering pos-
sible solutions to the problems.
REASONS FOR THE LACK OF IMPACT OF SOCIO-LEGAL

RESEARCH ON PUBLIC POLICY IN NIGERIA
As we have demonstrated clearly above, the sociology of law is very

relevant to the public policy and development need of Nigeria. Its lack of
real impact on the minds of Nigerians in general and on policy makers
specifically as an important and relevant discipline to the developmental
needs of Nigeria is predicated on extraneous factors that either directly or
indirectly hinge on the myths of globalization we have explained above.
Some of these extraneous factors are explained briefly in the following
paragraphs.
Narrow Perception of Development
Like in any neo-colonial capitalist society, development in Nigeria is

considered only in material rather than in social terms. Even in material
terms, the dominant perception is limited to infrastructural development,
such as the existence of good roads, high-rise buildings, the excess of
vehicles plying dual carriage roads, lighted streets and apartments, etc.
The technological and industrial aspects of material development, which
are more fundamental, do not seem to be important. Most unfortunately,
however, even the government places too much emphasis on infrastruc-
tural development. The social (particularly the socio-legal) aspects of
development are ignored almost completely. This is reflected in the fact
that none of Nigeria’s national development plans since independence
touched on socio-legal problems as an area requiring concrete attention.
Of course, over the years, the government seemed to realize the impor-
tance of social development as a prerequisite to material development by
putting in place a number of programs directed at dealing with social
problems in the country such as poverty, illiteracy, gender inequality, etc.
Administrators’ Prejudice against Academics
Policy makers and administrators have very deep-seated prejudice against

academics, particularly those academics whose policy recommendations
generate few contracts for the administrators. Such academics (including
socio-legal researches) are considered by most administrators and policy
makers to be out of touch with the realities on ground. Thus, policy rec-
ommendations based on well-researched knowledge from such academics
are more often than not condemned as “theories,” “rhetoric,” or “inexpe-
rience,” especially when a good number of these recommendations ap-
pear to be against administrators’ vested interests. As rightly wondered
by Odekunle (1981), “How do we expect judges, magistrates, and lawyer-
officials in the ministries of justice to accept and implement a proposal
which sees the legal profession for what it is and recommends the fram-
ing of laws in simple language and the adjudication of most criminal of-
fences through lay neighborhood and community juries?” (199).
Inadequate and Inappropriate Media for Transmitting Socio-Legal

Knowledge
The major media of transmission of social science knowledge in the

country are journals, research reports, conference/seminars/workshops
attendance and/or proceedings, and classroom teaching. First of all, let us
take journals. There is no single journal in the country devoted to pub-
lishing articles on socio-legal issues alone. Such articles are therefore
published in more generalized social science and/or interdisciplinary
journals scattered around the country, thereby making access to such arti-
cles very daunting to administrators in the relevant field. This problem
would have been smaller if socio-legal scholars were to publish their
findings and recommendations in newspapers and weekly or monthly
news magazines. However, the criteria for promotion in academia re-
quire one to publish in reputable and recognized academic journals rather
than in dailies and news magazines.
Meanwhile, research reports are usually submitted to those that spon-
sored the research. These sponsors are usually foreign research founda-
tions. The government hardly sponsors research to help it formulate and
execute viable policies. At best, they sponsor and/or organize confer-
ences, seminars, or workshops. What’s more, only very few administra-

tors attend such workshops, seminars, and conferences, and they, as
rightly noted by Odekunle (1981) appear to be more interested in “the
estacodes 5 of the trips and other allowances” than in the knowledge they
will gain there and bring ideas back to their work and organizations (198).
With regard to classroom teaching as a media of transmission, crimi-
nology is not taught in most universities and colleges in the country,
much less sociology of law, which can be regarded as a branch of crimi-
nology. Thus, our policy makers and administrators who went through
universities and colleges either before they became administrators or
through in-service training hardly got exposed to criminology in general
and sociology of law in particular. Consequently, the chasm between
socio-legal scholars and policy makers remains, perpetuating narrow-
minded suspicion and mistrust between them.
Lack of an Organized Body of Recipients of Socio-Legal Knowledge
The only organized body in Nigeria for the government to receive socio-
legal knowledge is the Law Reform Commission, whose activities are
over-centralized and lack adequate publicity. What’s more, the personnel
of the commission is dominated by legal professionals. The commission
is therefore as good as non-existent. As a result, even if and when policy
recommendations based on well-researched knowledge are made avail-
able in research reports, journal articles, conferences, seminars, workshop
papers, and guest lectures, they, as rightly noted by Odekunle (1981),
“Either remain on paper, are short-lived in terms of actual practice, or
their execution is left to the whims and caprices of individual officers and
officials” (198).
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
We have attempted in this modest paper to debunk the various taken-for-

granted positive arguments for globalization and to establish the rele-
vance of socio-legal studies particularly that of the sociology of law to
the development needs of Nigeria. We have also attempted to clearly
bring out the major impediments to real impact of socio-legal studies on
policy and development in Nigeria that have to be removed if we are to
move forward. In the following concluding paragraphs, we attempt to
5
Estacodes are the allowances given to government officials for their travels
either inside or outside the country.
suggest some of the things that can be done to remove these identified
impediments to the potential of socio-legal studies for real impact on pol-
icy and development in Nigeria.
The first major impediment identified in this paper is the govern-
ment’s narrow conception of development, which is partly due to its mis-
guided understanding of globalization. It is high time the government
and lay people of Nigeria realized that a well-rounded development goes
beyond infrastructural, technological, industrial, and economic develop-
ment. In addition to these material aspects of development, social aspects
(including socio-legal aspects) are very necessary for a well-rounded de-
velopment. It is only proper, therefore, that social aspects of develop-
ment be given equal treatment with technological and economic aspects
in our national development plans. The onus of making this possible lies
partly on the Social Science Academy of Nigeria, which was established
primarily to ensure that social sciences have a much needed impact on
public policy in Nigeria. The council should also press for the establish-
ment of an Institute of Criminology and Criminal Justice, which would be
responsible for promoting socio-legal aspects of development through
teaching, research, and policy recommendations and/or plans for the gov-
ernment on socio-legal matters.
The second impediment to real impact of the sociology of law on
public policy is administrators and policy makers’ prejudices about social
scientists in general and socio-legal scholars in particular. These preju-
dices are born out of ignorance. The lawyers, officials, judges, magis-
trates, police, warders, etc., usually condemn recommendations based
even on research knowledge as theories, rhetoric, or inexperience, be-
cause such recommendations appear to run counter to their interests,
when in fact they do not. The Hausa people say, “Gyara kayan ba sauke
mu raba ba ne,” meaning that if somebody observes that a load you are
carrying on your head is not properly placed and cautions you to place it
properly, he is not begging for a share of what you are carrying. He or
she merely wishes you well. In other words, recommendations by socio-
legal scholars are usually meant to improve the legal system in general
and the efficiency, effectiveness, and welfare of those working in the sys-
tem.
They are not meant to destroy the system. We think the best way to
remove this prejudice is to reduce the communication gap between policy
makers and administrators and socio-legal scholars and researchers by
encouraging worthwhile, functional interactions among them. For exam-
ple, the Institute of Criminology and Criminal Justice to be established
should involve public servants in the relevant ministries and agencies as
guest lecturers. The institute should be able to obtain funds from the
government, relevant ministries and agencies, and foreign research foun-

dations for policy-oriented research, and it should involve public servants
in the whole exercise of doing the research and making policy proposals
and/or recommendations based on the research. On their part, the gov-
ernment or relevant ministries and agencies should, as much as necessary,
involve socio-legal scholars from the institute in the implementation of
their socio-legal policies.
The third impediment to the real impact of socio-legal studies relates
to media of transmission of socio-legal knowledge. We observed that
these are limited in terms of both number and reach. In terms of number,
they include only journal articles, research reports, conferences, work-
shops, seminars, and classroom teaching. In other words, they exclude
popular media such as newspapers, magazines, radio, and television.
With regards to journals, we observed that there is no single journal spe-
cifically devoted to publishing socio-legal materials. In terms of reach,
we observe that socio-legal scholars are communicating only with each
other, rather than with administrators and policy makers, through their
limited number of media of transmission identified above. The reasons
are that while on one hand academic media are not popular with adminis-
trators and policy makers, on the other hand the popular media (i.e., elec-
tronic and print) are not attractive to most socio-legal scholars because
publishing in print media or giving radio and TV talks do not count much
toward career development in academia.
Four solutions suggest themselves here. First, there is a dire need for
founding at least one viable socio-legal journal, namely “The Nigerian
Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice.”
Second, higher institutions of learning and research centers, particu-
larly the Institute of Criminology and Criminal Justice (ICCJ) that is to be
established, should begin to highlight contributions in electronic and print
media among their criteria for promotion. Socio-legal scholars, on their
part, should endeavor to publish simplified versions of their journal arti-
cles in print media for a wider readership.
Third, there is a need for would-be lawyers, judges, and magistrates
to compulsorily take some key criminological courses such as law and
society; comparative legal systems; legal psychology; psychiatry, crime
and delinquency; sociology of crime and delinquency; sociology of pun-
ishment and corrections; etc., before they are finally called to the Bar.
They can take these courses in universities that offer such courses or in
the proposed Institute of Criminology and Criminal Justice; something
similar to internships for medical students. As for police and warders,
they should be taught these courses in their colleges or training camps by
socio-legal scholars as guest or part-time lecturers if they cannot find

qualified socio-legal scholars to employ on permanent basis.
Finally, attendance at two to three day conferences, workshop, and
seminars by public servants should be replaced by longer training work-
shops and seminars lasting between two and three months and involving
tests at the end of the workshops or seminars and follow-up workshops
and seminars for three weeks after about a year. In the follow-up work-
shops, participants should be made to report back what knowledge and
skills they have been able to take back to their workplaces and organiza-
tions. This will make attendance at workshops and seminars by public
servants less motivated by estacourts and other related allowances than
by the value of the workshops or seminars themselves. The proposed
ICCJ should serve as a center for such training workshops and seminars.
The fourth impediment to the real impact of socio-legal studies on
public policy identified in this paper relates to the recipients of socio-
legal knowledge. We observed that there is only one organized body of
recipients, namely the Law Reform Commission, whose membership is
composed predominantly people of the legal profession and whose activi-
ties are over-centralized and not adequately publicized. There is there-
fore the dire need for the commission 1) to establish branches in all the
states of the federation, including Abuja, and to expand its personnel to
include not only legal professionals but also sociologists, particularly
criminologists, and trained representatives of non-governmental organiza-
tions such as the CDHR, CLO, CSWS, FOMWAN, etc. The commis-
sion’s concern should be to assert “studied, documented claims for
changes in legislation and in state or parastatal structures” (Dias and Paul
1981: 376). In this regard, the commission should work hand-in-hand
with the proposed ICCJ. 2) The commission should also, on its own, go
to the people who have grievances in places and at times that provide
frank, full, and uninhibited deliberation. It should then publicize the
grievances and lobby for reform (Sa’ad and Mamman 1994: 11). In this
regard, the commission should work hand-in-hand with pressure groups
and organizations.
The fifth and final impediment to the real impact of socio-legal stud-
ies on public policy as explained in this paper is the various myths about
the benevolence of globalization and its processes. These myths are
clearly identified in this paper, and the precautions required in dealing
with them have also been pointed out in the relevant sections. Govern-
ments, researchers, and lay people in developing countries such as Nige-
ria need, therefore, to be alert to them.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ajomo, M.A. and L.E. Okagbue. Human Rights and the Administration
of Justice. Lagos, Nigeria: Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal
Studies, 1990.
Aubert, V. Sociology of Law. London: Penguin, 1969.
Coser, L.A. Masters of Sociological Thought: Ideas in Historical and
Social Context. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Jovanovich, 1971.
Dias, C.J. and J.C.N. Paul. “Lawyers, Legal Resources, and Alternative
Approaches to Development” In Lawyers in the Third World: Com-
parative and Developmental Perspectives, Dias, C.J. et al, eds. Upp-
sala, Sweden: Scandinavian Institute of African Studies, 1981.
Federal Republic of Nigeria. National Policy on Education. Lagos, Ni-
geria, 1977.
Gurvitch, G. Sociology of Law. London: Routledge, 1973.
Podgorekki, A. Law and Society. London: Routledge, 1974.
Sa’ad, A.M. “Justice in Borno State, Nigeria: An Assessment of Prison-
ers’ Experiences of the Criminal Justice Process.” Unpublished
M.Phil. Thesis, University of Cambridge, UK, 1984.
-----. “In Search of Justice for Nigeria: A Critical Analysis of the Formal
and Informal Justice Systems in Gongola State of Nigeria.” Unpub-
lished D.Phil. Thesis, University of Sussex, UK, 1988.
-----. “The Courts and Protection of Human Rights: An Assessment of
Plateau and Kano States.” Research Report submitted to the Social
Science Council of Nigeria, Ibadan, 1991.
-----. “Law and Justice among Gwoza Hills Dwellers in Nigeria: An As-
sessment of the Viability of Informal Justice in Democracy.” Re-
search Report submitted to the Department of Public Administration,
O.A.U., Ile-Ife and Centre for African Studies, Florida State Univer-
sity, 1994.
----- and P.T. Mamman. “Empowering the Rural People in Nigeria:
Overcoming Legal Constraints.” Paper presented at seminar on the
Crisis of Rural Development in Nigeria, Department of Political Sci-
ence and Administration, University of Maiduguri, Nigeria, 1994.
Steward, V.L. The Changing Faces of Juvenile Justice. New York: New
York University Press, 1978.
Usman, B. For the Liberation of Nigeria. London: New Beacon Books,
1979.
300 Feleke Tadele
The Relevance of Sociological Studies

and Training for Social Realities,
Development Policy, and Practice
in Ethiopia
Feleke Tadele, Ethiopian Society of Sociologists,
Social Workers, and Anthropologists, Ethiopia 1
This brief paper seeks to investigate the relevance of sociological

training and research and its contribution to social realities, development
policy, and practice in Ethiopia. In the context of the successive social
transformation process and the increased number of sociology students in
the country, can sociology play a constructive role in development policy
and practice in Ethiopia? Given the protracted nature of social transfor-
mations and poverty in Ethiopia, can sociological studies and training
contribute to a better understanding of social changes and structures?
The paper attempts to tackle these and other relevant questions. It begins
with a brief historical overview of sociological training and research in
Ethiopia. This is followed by the presentation of the relevance of socio-
logical studies and training to development policy and practice in the
country. Then the roles of the Ethiopian Society of Sociologists, Social
Workers, and Anthropologists (ESSSWA) in linking sociological training
and research are presented. Finally, the challenges to effective sociologi-
cal training and research are highlighted, and recommendations for future
courses of action are suggested.
1
Feleke Tadele is the President of Ethiopian Society of Sociologists, Social
Workers, and Anthropologists (ESSSWA). The views expressed in this paper
are those of the author and they do not necessarily reflect or represent the opin-
ions of either ESSSWA or the Department of Sociology at Addis Ababa Univer-
sity. The author can be contacted at [email protected].
The Relevance of Sociological Studies and Training for Social Realities, Development 301
Policy, and Practice in Ethiopia
SOCIOLOGICAL TRAINING AND RESEARCH IN

ETHIOPIA: A BRIEF HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
Some studies indicate that sociology as a discipline began to be practiced

at a tertiary level following the establishment of the then University Col-
lege of Addis Ababa and the subsequent establishment of the Haile
Selassie I University in the early 1950s (SOSA 2006; Admassie and Yn-
tiso 2006). In the relatively long period of time since then, sociological
training has reportedly passed through three major historical periods. The
first phase, covering the period between 1951-52 and 1978-79, was
marked by the stage when sociological courses were offered as part of the
general education program of the University College of Addis Ababa.
This culminated in the establishment of the Department of Sociology and
Anthropology as one of the departments under the Faculty of Arts. An-
other relevant development within the same period was the establishment
of the School of Social Work in 1959, which initially offered a two year
diploma program and was upgraded to a degree program in 1966. These
educational units appeared to have some functional distinctions. While
the sociological component of the training and research program was fo-
cusing on social change and “modernization” associated with urbaniza-
tion, industrialization, and socio-economic development, the anthropo-
logical component was specializing in the study of cultures of different
ethnic groups and nationalities.
The second phase of training in sociology has coincided with the re-
organization of higher education in the country following the socialist
revolution in 1974. The restructuring and revision of curriculum has re-
sulted in the merger of the Department of Sociology and Anthropology
and the School of Social Work and the emergence of the Department of
Applied Sociology (APSO) under the then-created College of Social Sci-
ences of Addis Ababa University. The curriculum, which followed the
reorganization, went into effect in the 1978-79 academic year and contin-
ued to offer undergraduate BA degree-level training in the combined
fields of sociology, anthropology, and social work for about seven years.
This period was also marked by ideological correctness and overloading
of the discipline of sociology with Marxist-Leninist courses such as
Marxian Sociology and Marxian Anthropology (Selassie 1986).
A subsequent revision of the undergraduate curriculum was under-
taken in 1985-86, which, once again, resulted in the renaming of the de-
partment as the Department of Sociology and Social Administration
(SOSA). This revision has resulted in the dropping of redundant courses
and introduction of new courses like History of Social Welfare, Social
302 Feleke Tadele
Administration, and the Application of Quantitative Procedures in policy

formulation (Selassie 1986).
The third phase of training in sociology was associated with the fur-
ther renaming of the department as the Department of Sociology and So-
cial Anthropology in 2002-3, which resulted in the offering of a balanced
and unified training in sociology and anthropology at BA degree level
and, to some extent, in social work at MA degree level. These arrange-
ments are believed to have provided a solid foundation for specialized
and independent sociological training at MA degree level since 2006.
The MA courses include sociological theories like the history of so-
ciological theory in the classical period; discussion of the nature and
structure of contemporary sociological theories; rigorous and comprehen-
sive examination of the main theoretical perspectives in contemporary
sociology, including the macro-structural perspectives of structural func-
tionalism and conflict theory as well as the micro-interactionist perspec-
tives of symbolic interactionism, ethnomethodology, exchange, and ra-
tional choice theories; and more recent developments and debates in so-
ciological theories, including the macro-micro and the structure-agency
integration as well as the debate on modern versus post-modern social
theories.
Some of the development-related courses include an overview of ur-
ban and rural sociology as fields of study; social structure and social or-
ganization in a comparative and historical perspective; the crisis of rural
livelihood in the Third World; rural and agrarian transformation in a his-
torical and comparative perspective; paths of capitalist agrarian transition;
political economy of the modern global food and agricultural system; the
rise of giant agro-business transnational corporations (TNCs); the para-
dox of Third World food dependency; the paradox of food insecurity and
famine in the midst of plenty; the food and agrarian crisis in Africa; the
debate on sustainable food and agricultural systems; the environmental
impact of the model of industrial agriculture, agro-biotechnology revolu-
tion; rural development in theory and practice; rural development policy
and planning in a comparative perspective; the adoption and diffusion of
agricultural innovations and technologies; and socio-cultural, institutional,
and agro-ecological barriers and facilitators of development.
Social policy and planning course that cover theories and policy
processes include social policy planning principles and values; policy
development, implementation and analysis in socio-economic and cul-
tural contexts; conceptual and analytical skills for understanding the
process and organization of social policy and planning issues. There are
also courses on contemporary social issues through an open and flexible
seminar course. This course has created the opportunity for the students
to discuss and debate topical and important national and global social
issues including gender, family, religion, social identity, crime, famine
and food security, environment, and globalization (SOSA 2006).
The Department of SOSA at Addis Ababa University further reports
that its sociology graduates have strong theoretical, methodological, and
practical competencies in the socio-cultural dimensions of the process of
urbanization, industrialization, and socio-economic development as well
as their ramifications at the local, regional, national, and global levels.
They are reportedly trained to follow the rich sociological tradition in
developing and transmitting critical thinking and understanding of issues
of social change and continuity, consensus and conflict, social action and
structure, as well as individualism and social solidarity that underline the
challenges of rapid urbanization, industrialization, and economic growth.
They are offered courses that expose students to various sociological per-
spectives and methods of investigation concerning the processes of
urbanization, industrialization, and socio-economic development. The
graduates are provided a broad range of sociological perspectives and
skills in designing and implementing socially viable and sustainable de-
velopment programs and projects. Through their thesis and term papers,
graduates are encouraged to coordinate and lead quality, multidisciplinary,
basic, and applied research projects that take into account and integrate
social and cultural dimensions in the development process.
As the Department of SOSA (2006) states, “The Graduate Program in
Sociology has begun to contribute towards the development of the disci-
pline of sociology in the country by training high caliber sociologists in
advanced sociological theory and research methods. It also responded to
the research and teaching staff needs of the Department of Sociology and
Social Anthropology as well as those of other higher learning and re-
search institutions in the country. It has produced professional sociolo-
gists capable of managing and administering social development pro-
grams in the public, private, and civil-society sectors.”
Despite the continuous revision of the sociology curriculum, one can
see uniformity in the patterns and the origins of the courses. They seem
to have been dominated by the orientation towards “Western theories,”
which present themselves as “universal” knowledge and global perspec-
tives in influencing sociological thinking. Little effort was exerted on
indigenous theorizing and introducing alternative perspectives through
courses grounded in Ethiopian and African social thinking as well as
“Southern” social theories and philosophical pursuits (Sumner 1998;
Connell 2007).
These courses have had little opportunity to explore the social think-
ing and social movement discourses that have emerged and developed in
304 Feleke Tadele
the “South,” the Islamic world, or even in Ethiopia in both oral and writ-
ten culture. For instance, Nereri’s African Socialism, Nelson Mandela’s
social reconciliation, Kwame Nkrumah’ s model of social change and
pan-Africanism, and Bantu Philosophy have significant relevance to the
study of sociology, and they were not given due considerations in the
courses which have so far been designed by the department. Similarly,
the 19th and 20th century noblemen, intellectuals, and statesmen from
Ethiopia; the literary works of Gebre Hiywet Baykedagn and Afework
Gebre Yesus; the social significance and co-existence of the Ethiopian
Orthodox Church and the Muslim League; and the role of significant
numbers of Ethiopian social institutions which have continued to shape
and re-shape social change process in Ethiopia were not covered well in
the courses taught at the department. Furthermore, social movements and
social philosophy from Asia like Sayyid Jamal ad-Din (Afghanistan) and
Mahatma Gandi’s and Nehru’s thinking (India) could be included as al-
ternative sources for sociological thinking and research in Ethiopia.
Therefore, I argue that the Department of Sociology, Addis Ababa Uni-
versity, has done little to theorize indigenous thinking and introduce al-
ternative perspectives through sociological courses grounded with
“Southern” social theories and philosophical pursuits.
THE RELEVANCE OF SOCIOLOGICAL STUDIES AND

TRAINING TO DEVELOPMENT POLICY AND PRACTICE
Since the 1990s, the growing recognition of the importance of participatory

and sustainable development approaches in Ethiopia has created a positive,
enabling environment for development practitioners (working for both
government and non-governmental organizations) to work proactively with
their target communities and community-based organizations. This, among
other things, has created the demand for professional sociologists. Accord-
ingly, the sociology department has enjoyed a massive increase in student
enrollment at Addis Ababa University, and a growing number of students
are employed in development policy and practice in government and non-
government offices. Some assessments (Tadele and Admassu 1996) indi-
cate that there has been a growing demand since the 1990s for the engage-
ment of sociologists in development practice. This has coincided with the
growing number of employment opportunities, notably in the non-
governmental organization (NGO) sector, and the integration of participa-
tory development approaches into technical government ministries such as
the Ministry of Water Resources and the Ministry of Works and Urban De-
velopment, which used to be less interested in social science graduates.
Based on the analysis of organizational assessment data of an um-

brella organization for the NGO sector in Ethiopia, Tadele (2006) re-
ported that sociologists comprise 38% of the top six professional labor
forces in the NGO/CSO sector that promote bottom-up development ap-
proach. They are followed by accountants (34%), health workers (13%),
economists (7%), agronomists (6%), and engineers (3%). These sociolo-
gists are assigned to work in occupational areas that include community
development / social sector development, community-based project man-
agement, gender and development, social policy and advocacy, as well as
social survey and diagnosis work.
Interviews with sociology professionals in the above areas of work
reveal that they have played significant roles in conducting community
diagnosis and social surveys whose findings have been used to design
socially appropriate and economically cost-effective programs for poor
urban and rural people. They have served as program officers or program
managers of development initiatives that were intended to facilitate social
change with the most vulnerable and socially deprived groups. With
emerging contemporary development issues and current development
work (such as HIV/AIDS, climate change, rural livelihoods, social capital,
and local economic development), most of the interviewed sociology
graduates indicated that some of the social theory courses that they have
taken during their stay in the university were less relevant or too obsolete
to be applied in their development work. They expect the Department of
Sociology or ESSSWA to create the platform for refreshing their ideas
and perspectives on contemporary social issues, development policies,
and practices.
THE ROLE OF THE ETHIOPIAN SOCIETY OF

SOCIOLOGISTS, SOCIAL WORKERS, AND
ANTHROPOLOGISTS (ESSSWA) IN
LINKING SOCIOLOGICAL TRAINING AND RESEARCH
The Ethiopian Society of Sociology, Social Work, and Anthropology

(ESSSWA) was founded in June 1996 as a professional society of soci-
ologists, social workers, and anthropologists. It currently has over 400
members, who are working in various organizations in the NGO sector,
higher learning institutions and universities, government offices, UN or-
ganizations, and grass roots civil society organizations and communities.
The primary goal of ESSSWA, among other things, is to promote
professional competence and ethics in the discipline of sociology and the
widespread application of the discipline in poverty reduction and devel-
306 Feleke Tadele
opment. It also strives to develop members’ professional competence and

enhance their effective contribution to the country’s development in their
fields of specialization. It assists Government, NGOs and the private sec-
tor and communities in translating the various development policies and
strategies into action. ESSSWA also advocates for the creation of a more
enabling environment and the development of a vibrant civil society in
the country, and it actively engages in policy analysis, research, and ad-
vocacy with a view to nurturing pluralism and offering alternative options.
A closer look into the operational and policy environment in which
ESSSWA is currently functioning reveals some considerable accom-
plishments. It has conducted annual conferences, which are believed to
have created opportunities for the exchange of ideas and experiences
among members. It has promoted empirical and policy oriented research
and debates in pertinent social development issues, particularly child de-
velopment. In this regard, the national professional association has initi-
ated capacity-building seminars and short-term training workshops to
strengthen the capacities of its members, particularly in relation to chil-
dren development and social policy issues. It has now begun to establish
and maintain links with continental and international professional asso-
ciations like the International Sociological Association.
Nevertheless, the national professional association has encountered
gaps and challenges in its endeavors. There is the challenging task of
making a meaningful contribution to the ongoing global and national
fight against poverty. A critical gap relevant to the association’s mission
and role in this regard is perhaps its ineffectiveness in working towards
the creation of a policy and institutional environment that could help ad-
dress the social dimensions of poverty such as social exclusion, neglect,
and abuse, as well as rising social evils and problems such as the disinte-
gration of the family, beggary, prostitution, homelessness, streetism,
crime, and substance abuse.
This professional association is also faced with the daunting chal-
lenge of bridging the current gap between social education and social
practice in the country. Discussions held in this regard with members of
ESSSWA, including both development practitioners and academics, indi-
cated the existence of a visible gap between the system of social educa-
tion and the system of social practice in the country. The former is said
to be, by and large, theory-driven and in most cases outdated. This calls
forth the need to make interventions that aim at bridging the gaps, par-
ticularly in the area of enabling the system of education to catch up with
the reality on the ground and to be as effective as possible in solving
problem on the ground.
CHALLENGES OF SOCIOLOGICAL TRAINING AND

STUDIES IN ETHIOPIA
As noted in section three of this paper, the professional study of Ethio-

pian societies had been dominated by foreigners such as Bahrey in the
16th century, Abu Rumi in the late 18th century, and Liq in the early 19th
century. However, in the 20th century there were some intellectual con-
tributions by a few Ethiopian scholars such as Gebre Hiywet Baykedagn
and Afework Gebre Yesus, who studied issues that have significant social
importance. Despite the continuous revision of the curriculum of sociol-
ogy, one can see uniformity in the patterns and origins of the courses.
They seem to have been dominated by an orientation toward “Western
theories,” which present themselves as “universal” knowledge and global
perspectives in influencing sociological thinking. Little effort was ex-
erted on theorizing indigenous thinking and introducing alternative per-
spectives through courses grounded with Ethiopian and African social
thinking, as well as “Southern” social theories and philosophical pursuits
(Sumner 1998; Connell 2007; Pankhurst 1996). Sumner’s (1998) recent
book on African Philosophy was also a significant contribution to theo-
rizing African social thinking and philosophy. Instead of building on
these contributions, the sociological courses at the Department of SOSA,
Addis Ababa University, trace little back to social knowledge grounded
in indigenous perspectives. This is further evidenced by the limited ca-
pacity of the Department of Sociology to promote academic research and
generating a theoretically-embedded, policy-relevant, and cumulative
body of knowledge.
Another institutional factor that has challenged the quality of the
study of sociology is the high student to instructor ratio (currently over
90), which is almost four times what it used to be two decades ago.
While it is encouraging to note the ever-increasing demand for sociologi-
cal courses by students, the university cannot cope with the increasing
demand for teachers and reading materials necessary to train such num-
bers of sociology students. These factors, along with the massive admis-
sion of students, have continued to threaten the quality of training and
research activities in sociology (Admassie and Yntiso 2006).
Furthermore, the absence of financial and budgetary resources, as
well as the lack of incentives for researchers, has negatively affected the
quality of teaching and research in sociology. There are little time, re-
sources, and publishing opportunities available to university teachers,
who are overloaded with teaching, administrative work, and a shortage of
books and reference materials (Selassie and Admassie 1989).
308 Feleke Tadele
The Department of Sociology does not seem to have proactive rela-

tions, systematic engagement, or continuous linkage and collaboration
with relevant governmental, non-governmental, and international partners.
The scholarly relations and collaborations with similar sociology pro-
grams, particularly with other African research institutions, seem to be
limited.
The policy-making environment in the country seems to have little
appreciation for using expert views and sociological research findings for
key decision-making purposes.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
After a journey of almost half a century, sociological training and re-

search at Addis Ababa University in Ethiopia is in a better state, as mani-
fested through the design of curricula at the BA and MA levels, the avail-
ability of increased number of training and research staff, as well as the
supply of books and other resource materials.
The department’s sociological training has produced professionals
who are serving their nation in various capacities. The training has pro-
vided vitally needed human resources for various governmental institu-
tions as well as non-governmental organizations. The post-graduate pro-
gram in sociology has strengthened the local capacity for social research
and publication and provided the basis for sustainable teaching staff in
sociology.
In spite of these positive contributions, the training and research ef-
forts in sociology have remained challenged by budget constraints, the
absence of academic research, high teacher-student ratios, and lack of
research and training incentives for university teachers.
Above all, few attempts were made during the revision of the sociol-
ogy curriculum to construct or draw “epistemological schemes” that are
deeply rooted in and informed by social and academic thoughts from
Ethiopia, Africa, and Asia.
As Ethiopia now enters into its new millennium, it is important for
the Department of Sociology and other social science scholars to engage
in special projects that help them to revisit the relevance of sociological
training and research in light of constructing an epistemological scheme
and knowledge foundation that would help Ethiopia create an independ-
ent sociological view of itself and its social horizon.
The end.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Admassie, Yeraswork and Gebre Yntiso. “African Sociological Review

10.1.2006.” CODESRIA. Dakar, Senegal, 2006.
Connell, Raewyn. Southern Theory: The Global Dynamics of Knowledge
in Social Science. Australia: Southwood Press, 2007.
ESSSWA. Strategic Plan Document: 2006-2008. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia,
2006.
Pankhurst, Alula, ed. Bulletin of the Founding Workshop of ESSSWA,
Ethiopian Society of Sociologists, Social Workers, and Anthropolo-
gists. Addis Ababa, 1996.
Pankhurst, Alula, ed. Proceedings of the Second Conference of ESSSWA,
Ethiopian Society of Sociologists, Social Workers, and Anthropolo-
gists. Addis Ababa, 1999.
Selassie, Seyoum G. and Yeraswork Admassie. “The Teaching of An-
thropology and Sociology in Ethiopia.” In Seyoum G. Selassie and
ei-Wathig Kameir, eds. Teaching and Research in Anthropology and
Sociology in Eastern African Universities. New Delhi: OSSREA,
1989.
SOSA. Curriculum of the Bachelor of Arts Program in Sociology and
Social Administration. Unpublished Document. 2003.
-----. Revised Curriculum of the Master of Arts Program in Sociology.
Unpublished Document. 2006.
Sumner, Claude. African Philosophy. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa Uni-
versity Press, 1998.
Tadele, Feleke. “Diary of A Misunderstood Sociologist.” In Pankhurst,
Alula, ed. Bulletin of the Founding Workshop of ESSSWA, the Ethio-
pian Society of Sociologists, Social Workers, and Anthropologists.
Addis Ababa, 1996.
----- and Anania Admassu. “The Contributions of Sociologists, Social
Workers, and Anthropologists.” In Pankhurst Alula, ed. Proceed-
ings of the Second Conference of ESSSWA, Ethiopian Society of So-
ciologists, Social Workers, and Anthropologists. Addis Ababa, 1999.
310 Challenges for a Global Sociology
Challenges for a Global Sociology 311
CONTENTS
VOLUME ONE: INTRODUCTION, LATIN AMERICA AND AFRICA
Preface
Acknowledgements from the Local Organizers

PART I: INTRODUCTION
1.Facing an Unequal World: Challenges for a Global Sociology
Michael Burawoy, University of California, Berkeley, USA
2.Challenges Facing Human Society in the 21st Century
Yuan-Tseh Lee, Academia Sinica, Taiwan
3.Sociology in Times of Crisis
Michel Wieviorka, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, Paris, France
4.The Imperative and the Challenge of Diversity: Reconstructing Sociological Traditions
in an Unequal World
PART II: LATIN AMERICA

5.Revitalizing the Sociological View in Latin America
Marcos Supervielle, Universidad de la República Oriental del Uruguay, Uruguay
6.On the Internationalization of Brazilian Academic Sociology
Tom Dwyer, State University of Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
7.The Dialogue between Criminology and the South’s Sociology of Violence: The
Policing Crisis and Alternatives
José-Vicente Tavares dos Santos, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
8.Challenges for and Practices in the Sociology of Work in Mexico: Between Global
Paradigms and Local Development Paradigms
Jorge Carrillo, El Colegio de la Frontera Norte (COLEF), Mexico
9.Publishing Sociological Journals in Argentina: Problems and Challenges
Alicia Itatí Palermo, Council of Professional Sociologists, Argentina
10.Sociology, Technology Parks, Applied Research, and International Accreditation
Napoleon Velástegui Bahamonde, University of Guayaquil, Ecuador
PART III: AFRICA

11.Practical Responses to the Challenges for Sociology in the Face of Global Inequality
Layi Erinosho, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Nigeria
12.Social Sciences in Egypt: The Swinging Pendulum between Commodification and

Criminalization
Mona Abaza, American University in Cairo, Egypt
13.South African Sociology: Current Challenges and Future Implications: A Review and
Some Empirical Evidence from the 2007 National Survey of Sociology Departments
Mokong Simon Mapadimeng, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa
14.Resistance to Rating: Resource Allocation, Academic Freedom and Citizenship
Tina Uys, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa
15.Poverty Fighters in Academia: The Subversion of the Notion of Socially Engaged
Science in the Mozambican Higher Education System
University of Cape Town, South Africa
16.Challenges of Doing Sociology in a Globalizing South: Between Indigenization and
Emergent Structures
Ifeanyi P. Onyeonoru, University of Ibadan, Nigeria
17.Globalization, Sociological Research, and Public Policy in Nigeria: A Critical Analysis
of the Relevance of Socio-Legal Research to the Development Needs of Nigeria
Abdul-Mumin Sa’ad, University of Maiduguri, Nigeria
18.The Relevance of Sociological Studies and Training for Social Realities, Development
Feleke Tadele, Ethiopian Society of Sociologists, Social Workers, and Anthropologists,
Ethiopia
VOLUME TWO: ASIA
PART IV: WESTERN ASIA

19.Donor Community and the Market of Research Production: Framing and De-Framing
the Social Sciences
Sari Hanafi, American University of Beirut, Lebanon
20.A Critical Review of the Iranian Attempts at the Development of Alternative
Sociologies
Mohammad Amin Ghaneirad, National Research Institute for Science Policy, Iran
21.Israeli Sociology's Position in International Sociology and the Challenges It Faces
Sammy Smooha, University of Haifa, Israel
22.The Center-Periphery Relationship between Turkish and Western Sociologies
Aytül Kasapoğlu, Nilay Çabuk Kaya, and Mehmet Ecevit, Sociological Association of
Turkey
23.Challenges for Sociology in Azerbaijan

Abulfaz D. Suleymanov, Institute of Philosophy, Sociology and Law, Azerbaijan
National Academy of Sciences, Azerbaijan
24.Modernization of Sociology in Post-Soviet Armenia
Gevorg Poghosyan, Armenian Sociological Association
25.Challenges to Sociology in the Gulf States: A Case Study of Kuwait
Fahad Al-Naser, Kuwait University, Kuwait
PART V: ASIA-PACIFIC
26.The Definition and Types of Alternative Discourses
Syed Farid Alatas, National University of Singapore, Singapore
27.Indigenization, Institutionalization, and Internationalization: Tracing the Paths of the
Development of Sociology in Taiwan
Mau-kuei Chang, Ying-hwa Chang, Chih-chieh Tang, Academia Sinica, Taiwan
28.Are Asian Sociologies Possible? Universalism versus Particularism
Yoshimichi Sato, Tohoku University, Japan
29.Doing Sociology in Native Languages in a Globalizing World: Thinking about its
Significance and Difficulty in Japan
Takashi Machimura, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo, Japan
30.Antipodes: Australian Sociology’s Struggles with Place, Memory, and Neoliberalism
Raewyn Connell, University of Sydney, Australia
31.New Zealand Sociology in a Neoliberal Era: Strands of Political Economy in New
Zealand Social Science
Charles Crothers, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand
32.Contesting Mainstream Sociology and Developing Alternative Public Sociologies in
Indonesia
Rochman Achwan and Iwan G. Sujatmiko, University of Indonesia, Jakarta
33.Policy-Driven Research, Audit Culture, and Power: Transforming Sociological
Practices in the Philippines
Emma Porio, Ateneo de Manila University, Philippines
34.Vietnamese Farmers Face the WTO: Implications for Sociology
Vu Hao Quang, Institute of Public Opinion Research, Vietnam
35.Sociological Enterprise at the Periphery: The Case of Sri Lanka
Siri Hettige, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka
36.Indian Sociology Faces the World
Ishwar Modi, India International Institute of Social Sciences, Jaipur, India
37.Fifty Years of Bangladesh Sociology: Towards a “Hybrid Sociology”?
Shaikh Mohammad Kais, University of Rajshahi, Bangladesh
VOLUME THREE: EUROPE AND CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS
PART VI: WESTERN, NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN EUROPE

38.Diversity or Fragmentation in Europe’s Sociology: Lessons to be Learned?
Christian Fleck, University of Graz, Austria
39.The Relevance of Relevance: Social Sciences and Social Practice in Post-Positivistic
Society
Pekka Sulkunen, University of Helsinki, Finland
40.Mode 2 Sociologies in Denmark? From Crisis to Stabilization in Times of Pressures for
Policy-Relevant Research, 1980s-2000s
Kristoffer Kropp and Anders Blok, Copenhagen University, Denmark
41.The Increasingly Dominated Fraction of the Dominant Class: French Sociologists
Facing the Challenges of Precarity and Middle Class Destabilization
Louis Chauvel, Sciences Po, Paris, France
42.The International Benchmarking of Sociology: The Case of the UK
John Holmwood, University of Birmingham, United Kingdom
43.Our (Scientific) Community and Our Society: Rethinking the Role and Dilemmas of
National Sociological Associations:The Portuguese Case
Luis Baptista and Paulo Machado, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal
44.Facing a Globalizing World: Some Suggestions for a Global Sociology
Marina Subirats, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Spain
PART VII: EASTERN AND CENTRAL EUROPE

45.Sociology in Eastern Europe or East European Sociology: Historical and Present
Janusz Mucha, AGH University of Science and Technology, Poland
46.Internal and External Models in Hungarian Sociology
Dénes Némedi, Eötvös University, Hungary
47.Value-Free Sociology: Withstanding Political Pressures
Georgy Fotev, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Bulgaria
48.The Role of Theory: Sociology's Response to the Bologna Educational Reform in
Croatia
Inga Tomić-Koludrović, University of Zadar, Croatia
49.Changes and Problems of Russian Sociology
Valery A. Mansurov, Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia
50.Challenges to Teaching Sociology in Slovakia Posed by Entry into the European Union
Rastislav Bednárik, Institute of Labour and Family Research, Slovak Republic
PART VIII: CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS

51.Practical Responses to the Challenges for Sociology in the Face of Global Inequality?
Jan Marie Fritz, University of Cincinnati, USA
52.Reflections on the ISA National Associations Conference on Sociology in an Unequal
World
Devorah Kalekin-Fishman, University of Haifa, Israel
53.Facing an Unequal Sociology: Comments and Suggestions
Arturo Rodriguez Morato, Universidad de Barcelona, Spain

40 2010 04 18 15 04 40 FacingAnUnequalWorld.v1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

40 2010 04 18 15 04 40 FacingAnUnequalWorld.v1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

40 2010 04 18 15 04 40 FacingAnUnequalWorld.v1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FACING AN UNEQUAL WORLD :

CHALLENGES FOR A GLOBAL SOCIOLOGY

VOLUME ONE: INTRODUCTION, LATIN AMERICA AND AFRICA

A Joint Publication of The

These Conference Proceedings are jointly published by the Institute of Sociology at

Copyright for the individual papers belongs to the authors.

Please direct inquiries to:

Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica

Editors: Michael Burawoy, Mau-kuei Chang, and Michelle Fei-yu Hsieh

VOLUME ONE: INTRODUCTION,

Acknowledgements from the Local Organizers xiii

1.Facing an Unequal World: Challenges for a Global Sociology 3

2.Challenges Facing Human Society in the 21st Century 28

3.Sociology in Times of Crisis 35

4.The Imperative and the Challenge of Diversity: Reconstructing 48

PART II: LATIN AMERICA

5.Revitalizing the Sociological View in Latin America 63

6.On the Internationalization of Brazilian Academic Sociology 84

7.The Dialogue between Criminology and the South’s Sociology of 105

8.Challenges for and Practices in the Sociology of Work in Mexico: 126

9.Publishing Sociological Journals in Argentina: Problems and 157

10.Sociology, Technology Parks, Applied Research, and International 166

PART III: AFRICA

11.Practical Responses to the Challenges for Sociology in the Face of 181

12.Social Sciences in Egypt: The Swinging Pendulum between 187

13.South African Sociology: Current Challenges and Future Implications: 213

14.Resistance to Rating: Resource Allocation, Academic Freedom and 224

15.Poverty Fighters in Academia: The Subversion of the Notion of Socially 245

16.Challenges of Doing Sociology in a Globalizing South: Between 268

17.Globalization, Sociological Research, and Public Policy in Nigeria: 282

18.The Relevance of Sociological Studies and Training for Social 300

number of the participants were either trained in North America or had

Michael Burawoy, December 19, 2009

More importantly, learning about other distinctive national sociolo-

Mau-kuei Chang and Michelle Fei-yu Hsieh, Academia Sinica

Facing an Unequal World: Challenges for a

Yuan-Tseh Lee, former president of Academia Sinica and Nobel Prize

1 I am grateful to Emma Porio for her comments on an earlier version of this

There is an obvious resistance to focusing on such divisions in our

texts, so as to knit them together into a global configuration, albeit con-

THE CONTEXT OF INEQUALITY AND DOMINATION

The challenges we face are immediately apparent in our own association.

From Academic Dependency to Western Hegemony

Inequalities don’t simply exist, but are produced through relations of

creasingly has become “sociology in Poland,” even more so af-

Sinicization was replaced by a move toward indigenization as

National and Regional Hegemonies

Hegemony within world sociology cannot be reduced to a simple North-

rating system effectively internalizes the hegemony of

tion of research by Western interests, the reduction of sociol-

The Neoliberal Crisis

Academic dependency across nations is itself being reconfigured as the

value of the sociology credential falls relative to other creden-

FROM DIVERSE TRADITIONS TO

ditions in Sociology, edited by Nikolai Genov (1989), emerged from the

only President to come from a recently decolonized society, he was the

ern theory is not embedded in some material experience, nor reflective of

BUILDING NATIONAL SOCIOLOGIES

ciology. Whether we are talking of surveys or case studies, policy sociol-