Search

This article investigates the relationship between disciplinarity and feminist knowledge-making in Australia's humanities and social sciences. To identify the conditions of possibility for successful feminist knowledge projects, we interpret career trajectories of senior feminist and gender researchers within five disciplines: economics, history, philosophy, politics and sociology. Feminist knowledge-making about gender occurs in every field, but it has uneven impact and status in relation to different disciplinary practices. Career trajectories are analysed to understand how feminist research is practiced within, or perhaps against or beyond, conventional disciplinarity. Strategies for feminist knowledge-making vary across and within fields. Epistemic pluralism is a key possibility condition necessary for feminist knowledge-making. In fields characterized by conceptual openness (sociology, history), feminist knowledge-making can most easily be practiced as 'core' disciplinary work. In disciplines characterized by epistemic closure, feminists are carving out new subfields within (economics, politics) and beyond (philosophy) their mainstream disciplinarities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Within different social science and humanities disciplines, there has been debate about the impact of feminist knowledges and scholarship by women in general. This study systematically investigates the differential impact of feminist thought on disciplinary domains in the social sciences and humanities. Using quantitative citation data from the Web of Science, we investigate the extent to which gender-related research is produced and circulated in the 'centres' of six disciplines: economics, history; international relations; political science; philosophy and sociology. We then analyse the production and circulation of knowledge produced in feminist disciplinary sub-fields. The study findings show gender inequality persists, evidenced by gender representation in editorial positions and authorship. The proportion of gender-related research articles published in sociology is significantly greater than in economics, history, international relations, philosophy and political science. Interdisciplinarity appears to mediate the status of feminist knowledge within disciplines. The marginalisation of feminist discipline subfields appears to be constituted through practices of strong disciplinarity. Highlights • Gender inequalities persist in the practice and organization of disciplinary knowledge. • The impact of feminist knowledge on social science disciplines has been uneven. • Citation patterns reveal disciplinary differences in patterns of knowledge circulation. • Interdisciplinarity mediates the status of feminist knowledge within disciplines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How is global‐North predominance in the making of organized knowledge affected by the rise of new domains of research? This question is examined empirically in three interdisciplinary areas – climate change, HIV‐AIDS, and gender studies – through interviews with 70 researchers in Southern‐tier countries Brazil, South Africa and Australia. The study found that the centrality of the North was reinstituted as these domains came into existence, through resource inequalities, workforce mechanisms, and intellectual framing. Yet there are tensions in the global economy of knowledge, around workforce formation, hierarchies of disciplines, neoliberal management strategies, and mismatches with social need. Intellectual workers in the Southern tier have built significant research centres, workforces and some distinctive knowledge projects. These create wider possibilities of change in the global structure of organized knowledge production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines a group of intellectual workers who occupy a peripheral but not powerless position in the global economy of knowledge. How do they handle relations with the global metropole, especially in new fields of research where established hierarchies are in question? Three new domains of knowledge - climate change, HIV/AIDS and gender studies - are studied through interviews with 70 active researchers in Southern-tier countries Brazil, South Africa and Australia. A pattern of extraversion, involving active adoption of paradigms from the metropole, is widespread and institutionally supported. Major alternative knowledge formations have not emerged in these domains. However contestations of more specific kinds are frequent. Paradigms are adapted, criticism is offered, activism is engaged, capacities are developed and allegiances sometimes changed. The valorization of local knowledge, which goes beyond the abstractions of universalized paradigms, is particularly significant. Not stark subordination, but a complex collective negotiation characterizes the response of intellectual workers in the Southern tier. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]