Search

By highlighting a large number of recent studies mainly based on empirical methods, the aim of this paper is to emphasise and illustrate the rising influence of legal sociology in France today, and the interesting results produced. More generally, it is noteworthy to emphasise the growing importance of law and legal domains as a topic of great interest in French social sciences in general. It remains an open question whether this trend is linked to the ‘judicialisation’ of French politics and society and its influence over the academic field, or, alternatively, to the growing capacity of social scientists to resist the monopolistic claim of French academic lawyers on the analysis of legal subjects and to develop their own. Nevertheless, those trends converge towards a better knowledge of French legality, relevant from a national perspective, as well as to assess its contribution to socio-legal knowledge in general. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article develops a theory of interdisciplinarity and examines relations between historians and sociologists in Germany and France over the course of the twentieth century, focusing in on several key moments of interdisciplinary activity. Interdisciplinary engagements are motivated by scholarly problems, field-specific interests and battles, and pressures and inducements coming from states, businesses, and scientific institutions. Analysis of the most productive moments of cross-disciplinary interaction suggests that they occur when disciplines are equal in power and when scholars are motivated by scholarly problems and disciplinary conflicts to move beyond their disciplines. More generative forms of interdisciplinarity are dialogic and processual, characterized by a fusion of perspectives; less productive forms are externally induced, involve asymmetrical partners, and are organized around division of disciplinary labor rather than an interpenetration of perspectives. The most productive interdisciplinary conjunctures result from serendipitous resonances and contingent synchronicities between subfields of semi-autonomous disciplines. It is thus impossible to produce the most fruitful forms of interdisciplinarity deliberately. The article examines three cases of symmetrical, processual interdisciplinarity involving sociology and history. Two of these cases were located in the French academic field, first between the wars, and then again after 1980. The other case of dialogic collaboration between historians and sociologists begins in Nazi Germany and continues after 1945 into the 1960s, leading to the formation of West German Historische Sozialwissenschaft. Examples of unbalanced interdisciplinarity include German “History-Sociology” during the Weimar Republic, in which sociologists’ opening to history was not reciprocated by professional historians and Historische Sozialwissenschaft after 1970. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Copyright of Annales: Histoire, Sciences Sociales is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses the intellectual state of sociology of work in France in the context of social integration, social values and social interaction. It mentions change in the French sociology of work over the decades and that it is attracting much less attention outside of France than it did in the 1970. It presents French sociology of work in terms of art, style and paradigms.

This study provides a sociological commentary on the current debates within health technology assessment (HTA), specifically in response to the approaches taken in France, The Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. It argues that HTA is part of a wider reflexive innovation system that seeks to order current and prospective technologies. The study discusses the socio-political process of HTA priority setting, the rhetorical role of HTA, the localised and contingent use of HTA, and the policy gap between guidelines and practice. It argues for the development of new types of methodologies for assessment and for a stronger social embedding of HTA practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]