Performing Research Capability Building in New Zealand's Social Sciences: Capacity–Capability Insights from Exploring the Work of BRCSS's ‘sustainability’ Theme,2004–09
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online June, 2011
Performing Research Capability Building in New Zealand's Social Sciences: Capacity–Capability Insights from Exploring the Work of BRCSS's ‘sustainability’ Theme,2004–09
Many governments are seeking to ‘mature’ social science through research capability. The Building Research Capability in the Social Sciences (BRCSS) experiment gave New Zealand's social science community a chance to mature itself through capability building. We examine the emergence of BRCSS's ‘sustainability’ research theme. Selected as one of five key research themes because of its public good investment priority and the level of social science interest, the meanings and purpose of the theme emerged in practice. We present the theme as a series of performances through the life of BRCSS, itself an emergent assemblage of changing theoretical projects, research and policy priorities, and research capability. Reading the experiment reflexively from the inside, we consolidate the experience of performing new research practices into existence to reconceptualise and theorise research capability. We conclude that any fresh engagement in substantive issues must confront how knowledge production might be done differently, and that experimentation around capacities and capabilities for knowledge production begins to open up substantive concerns in fresh and generative ways.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenJCochraneA, 2009, “Assemblages of state power: topological shifts in the organization of government and politics”, draft manuscript, available from lead author j.r.allen@open.ac.uk
2.
BedfordD, 2005, “Improving the knowledge base for social policy: a brief review of some developments in New Zealand, 2001–2005”, paper presented to the Roundtable on ‘The research and policy nexus: finding the best path to policy relevance and intellectual freedom’, sponsored by the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada, and the International Metropolis Project, 17 October, Building Research Capability in the Social Sciences Network, Wellington
3.
BedfordR, 2009Final Report to Tertiary Education Commission (Building Research Capability in the Social Sciences Network, Wellington)
4.
BRCSS, 2005, “Introducing BRCSS (Building Research Capability in the Social Sciences)”, http://www.brcss.net.nz
5.
BRCSS Network, 2005, Transcript of Diverse Households, Communities and Settlements discussions, held Federation Room, Old Government House, University of Auckland, 18 March; copy available from e.leheron@auckland.ac.nz
6.
CampbellHBurtonRCooperMHenryMLe HeronELe HeronRLewisNPawsonEPerkinsHRocheMRosinCWhiteT, 2009, “Forum. From agricultural science to biological economies?”New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research5291–97
7.
CarolanM, 2004, “Ontological politics: mapping a complex environmental problem”Environmental Values13497–522
8.
CarolanM, 2009, “‘I do therefore there is’: enlivening socio-environmental theory”Environmental Politics181–17
9.
ChapmanDFlawsMLe HeronR, 2006, “A due diligence report on New Zealand's educational contribution to the UN decade of education for sustainable development”Journal of Geography in Higher Education30281–292
GertlerM, 2001, “Best practice? Geography, learning and the institutional limits to strong convergence”Journal of Economic Geography15–26
12.
Gibson-GrahamJ-K, 2005A Postcapitalist Politics (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN)
13.
Gibson-GrahamJ K, 2008, “Diverse economies: performative practices for ‘other worlds’”Progress in Human Geography32613–632
14.
GilbertJ, 2005Catching the Knowledge Wave? The Knowledge Society and the Future of Education (NZCER Press, Wellington)
15.
HackmannH, 2009, “Opening address”, World Social Science Forum, Bergen
16.
HinchliffeSBinghamN, 2008, “Securing life: the emerging practices of biosecurity”Environment and Planning A401534–1551
17.
HollowayLMorrisCGilnaBGibbsD, 2009, “Biopower, genetics and livestock breeding: (re)constituting animal populations and heterogeneous biosocial collectivities”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series34394–407
18.
JasanoffS (Ed.), 2004States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and Social Order (Routledge, London)
19.
LarnerW, 2009, “Wise science in the 21st century”, Keynote address to Runninghot!2008 Interconnection: NZ science in the 21st century, Oxygen Group and He Waka Tāngata, Royal Society of New Zealand, Wellington; copy available from w.larner@bristol.ac.uk
20.
LarnerWLe HeronR, 2002, “From economic globalisation to globalising economic processes: towards post-structural political economies”Geoforum33415–419
21.
LarnerWLe HeronR, 2005, “Neo-liberalising spaces and subjectivities: reinventing New Zealand's universities”Organization12843–862
22.
LarnerWLe HeronRLewisN, 2007, “Co-constituting neoliberalism: globalising governmentalities and political projects in Aotearoa New Zealand”, in Neoliberalisation: States, Networks and People Eds EnglandKWardK (Routledge, London) pp 233–247
23.
LarnerWLewisNLe HeronR, 2009, “State spaces of ‘after neoliberalism’: co-constituting the New Zealand designer fashion industry”, in The Political Economy of Scale Eds KeilRMahonR (University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver) pp 177–194
24.
LatourB, 2004Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Science into Democracy (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
25.
LawJ, 2004After Method: Mess in Social Science Research (Routledge, London)
26.
LawJUrryJ, 2004, “Enacting the social”Economy and Society33390–410
27.
Le HeronR, 2009, “‘Rooms and moments’ in neo-liberalising policy trajectories of metropolitan Auckland, New Zealand: towards constituting progressive spaces through Post Structural Political Economy (PSPE)”Asia Pacific Viewpoint50135–153
28.
Le HeronELe HeronRLewisN, 2009, “Constituting the life of an intervention: practice, performance, trajectories and effects of the BRCSS sustainability of diverse households, communities and settlements theme”, paper presented to the BRCSS conference: Social Sciences—A Celebration, Wellington, June; copy available from the authors
29.
LewisN, 2009, “Progressive spaces of neoliberalism?”Asia Pacific Viewpoint50113–119
30.
LewisNThornsD, 2005, “BRCSS: Building a network and a knowledge space in critical conditions”, OP 1, Building Research Capability in the Social Sciences Network, Wellington
31.
LewisNLarnerWLe HeronR, 2008, “The New Zealand designer fashion industry: making industries and co-constituting political projects”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series3342–59
32.
LewisNLe HeronRLe HeronE, 2010, “Experimentation in knowledge production: the BRCSS knowledge space” (submitted)
33.
LezaunJ, 2006, “Creating a new object of government: making genetically modified organisms traceable”Social Studies of Science36499–531
34.
LiT, 2007a, “Practices of assemblage and community forest management”Economy and Society36263–293
35.
LorrimerH, 2005, “Cultural geography: the busyness of being ‘more-than-representational’”Progress in Human Geography2983–94
36.
LuntNDavidsonC, 2002, “Increasing social science research capacity: some supply-side considerations”Social Policy Journal of New Zealand181–17
37.
MarshallB, 2009, Summary of New Zealand masters and doctoral theses with sustainability in the title. Compiled 30 May. University of Auckland Library
38.
MartinR, 2001, “Geography and public policy: the case of the missing agenda”Progress in Human Geography25189–210
39.
MaxeyL, 2007, “From ‘alternative’ to ‘sustainable’ food”, in Alternative Food Geographies: Representation and Practice Eds MayeDHollowayLKneafseyM (Elsevier, Amsterdam) pp 55–76
MolA, 1999, “Ontological politics: a word and some questions”, in Actor Network Theory and After Eds LawJHasardsJ (Blackwell, Oxford) pp 74–89
42.
MolA, 2002, The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice (Duke University Press, Durham, NC)
43.
NowotnyH, 2006, “Bargaining, not borrowing: on problem choice and problem space”Socio-Economic Review6754–759
44.
NowotnyH, 2009, “Welcome address”, World Social Science Forum, Bergen
45.
RedcliftM, 1987Sustainable Development: Exploring the Contradictions (Methuen, London)
46.
RedcliftM, 1997, “Sustainability and theory: an agenda for action”, in Globalising Food: Agrarian Questions and Global Restructuring Eds GoodmanDWattsM (Routledge, London) pp 333–343
47.
RedcliftM, 2002, “Pathways to sustainability”Geography87189–190
48.
RedcliftM, 2005, “Sustainable development (1987–2005): an oxymoron comes of age”Sustainable Development13212–227
49.
RoutledgeP, 2008, “Acting in the network: ANT and the politics of generating associations”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space26199–217
50.
Social Science Delegate's Report, 2010International Perspectives on Social Science: Opportunities for New Zealand report of the New Zealand delegation to the World Social Science Forum, Bergen and European Science agencies in Brussels, Ministry of Research Science Technology, Wellington; prepared by L Munro, D Johnston, R Le Heron, N Lewis, R Peace, L Patterson, D Thorns, A Wolf
51.
SunleyP, 2008, “Relational economic geography: a partial understanding or a new paradigm?”Economic Geography841–26
TraugerA, 2007, “Connecting social justice to sustainability: discourse and practice in sustainable agriculture in Pennsylvania”, in Alternative Food Geographies: Representation and Practice Eds MayeDHollowayLKneafseyM (Elsevier, Amsterdam) pp 39–54
54.
WebbC, 2009, “Social futures for Aotearoa/New Zealand in a global era”, presented to the BRCSS conference ‘Social Sciences—A Celebration’, Wellington, June; copy available from colin.webb@tec.govt.nz
55.
WeinerB, 2009, “A theory of organizational readiness for change”Implementation Science4 article 67, 1–9
56.
WhatmoreS, 2006, “Materialist returns: practising cultural geography in and for a more-than-human world”Cultural Geographies13600–609
