Search

Sociologists have long been interested in the meaning workers derive from their jobs. The issue has garnered increasing academic and policy attention in recent years with the concept of "meaningful work," yet little is known about how social stratification relates to access to it. This paper addresses this issue by exploring how the meaningfulness of jobs—as rated by their incumbents—is stratified across classes and occupations in a national survey of 14,000 working adults in the United Kingdom. It finds modest differentials between classes, with those in routine and manual occupations reporting the lowest levels of meaningfulness and those in managerial and professional occupations and small employers and own account workers reporting the highest levels. Detailed job attributes (e.g., job complexity and development opportunities) explain much of the differences in meaningfulness between classes and occupations, and much of the overall variance in meaningfulness. The main exception is the specific case of how useful workers perceive their jobs to be for society: A handful of occupations relating to health, social care, and protective services which cut across classes stand out from all other occupations. The paper concludes that the modest stratification between classes and occupations in meaningful work is largely due to disparities in underlying job complexity and development opportunities. The extent to which these aspects of work can be improved, and so meaningfulness, especially in routine and manual occupations, is an open, yet urgent, question. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After the appointment of its first full-time professor in L.T. Hobhouse in 1907, British sociology lost an environmental approach that might have substantially altered the shape of the discipline. The environmental approach was that of Patrick Geddes, who made the relationship between people and their environments central for individual and social well-being. In spite of the fact that urban Britain was undergoing environmental crisis due to the negative effects of unrestrained industrialization, a range of other circumstances, personal as well as political and both inside and outside the academy, conspired to coalesce in the more or less deliberate exclusion of Geddes' ideas. The paper suggests that sociologists need to take a radically reflexive approach to the history of their own discipline that recognizes its embeddedness in the wider social world, since both individual and social action, as well as structural forces, may be as influential as quality or coherence in determining the fate of the ideas and theories that they create. In Geddes' case, this leads to a re-examination of both the historical context and the debate surrounding the establishment of sociology at the London School of Economics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The dominant position on research methodology and methods among British sociologist has for many years been that of 'methodological pluralism'. However, concerns have lately been expressed about the lack of research involving quantitative methods, not least by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). A study of the four mainstream British journals over two years, tighter with associated sources, demonstrates national patterns of research methods used in published work, the topics tackled and variations between authors in the methods chosen. The findings suggest empirical support for the concerns recently expressed by the ESRC, and an argument, not for less qualitative research, but for more quantitative research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I hope to offer a global picture of what is happening in the world of qualitative data archiving. Qualidata is in a strong position to be able to offer this insight as it was the world's first initiative to pioneer preservation of qualitative social science data on a national scale. This was facilitated by the Economic and Social Science Research Council (ESRC), Britain's largest sponsor of social science research, implementing a mandatory policy for research grant holders to offer datasets of all kinds created in the course of their research. The policy has been met with both great support and animosity from the research community. In this paper I examine some of the reasons why the concept of sharing qualitative data generates such mixed feelings. Qualidata's work has provided sparks of inspiration to a number of research groups across the world beginning to consider the systematic preservation of qualitative data. Over the past four years we have been approached by embryonic "qualidata" projects for advice on issues surrounding archiving and providing access to qualitative data. Many have used Qualidata procedures as a starting point for developing their own archiving procedures (which were devised initially from a cross-fertilisation of UK Data Archive and traditional archiving procedures). Typically these groups tend to be sociologists, and surprisingly have had little or no contact with the social science Data Archives in their own countries. Furthermore, we are still not aware of any other national funders of social research across the world who have realised the added value that archiving of qualitative data can bring. I hope to provide a quick world tour of progress in the field and then suggest some of the key objectives that I think need to be met in order to achieve a respectable tradition and infrastructure for preserving and re-using qualitative data. I will touch on optimal and cost effective models for qualitative data archiving, discuss issues surrounding the documentation of data, and finally, address the need for meaningful collaboration at the international level, such as by creating a Network for Qualitative Data Archiving (INQUADA). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is a paper about what happens when a form of knowledge moves to another part of the university. The author, identifying himself as an 'ex-sociologist', investigates the relationship between the sociology of work, employment and organization and various 'critical' traditions within the business school. I argue that the contemporary divide between sociologies of work and employment, and Critical Management Studies ( CMS) within the business school rests in part on developments in UK sociology in the 1960s and 70s. This means that divergent understandings of the role of sociology and its relevant theoretical resources provided the deep structure for the current tension between CMS on the one hand and research on work and employment on the other. The movement of sociologists and industrial relations academics to the business school provided the preconditions for two very different critical traditions. The paper concludes with thoughts on what it means to be an outsider inside an institution, and on the future prospects for Burawoy's 'critical' or 'public' sociologies in UK business schools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social enterprises face extraordinary pressures, both endogenous and exogenous in nature. In light of the social and economic upheaval occurring on a global scale, these pressures are more acute than ever. This paper uses the concept of isomorphism as a starting point to explore how these organisations respond to pressure to ensure the conferment and maintenance of legitimacy. In so doing, I propose a conceptual model that utilises current work in the field and also redevelops J.Pedersen and F. Dobbin's (2006. In search of identity and legitimation: bridging organizational culture and neoinstitutionalism. American behavioral scientist, 49, 897–907) framework to categorise social enterprise isomorphism. Based on recent experiences in the United Kingdom, I propose that Government supported social enterprise initiatives (and the civil society movement in general) might make popular policy makers but is also fragile in its success. Thus, I use the applied example of social enterprise governance to illustrate the practical implications for structural similitude. Limitations to the model and directions for further empirical research are proposed to encourage further refinement to, or competing interpretations of, the model. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This paper argues that sociologists interested in service work in consumer culture should pay attention to customers' understandings and accounts of their experience and participation in service encounters. It takes the market for sex as a case study and counters the neglect of customers within the study of service work by analysing customer service reviews of paid-for sex published on a UK website, Punternet. It argues that male customers, familiar with the norms of consumer culture, assess the erotic, aesthetic and emotional labours performed by female workers to make judgements of service quality which suggests that the feminised 'good worker' is defined as professional when they disguise the market transaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper offers reflections on the author's working experience as an industrial sociologist from the 1960s. It seeks to contextualise this in more general considerations of the part played by industrial sociology in the development of sociology in the UK. This is evidenced in thematic concerns, the importance of historical perspectives as well as the use of case studies and the development of ethnographic work. It discusses the role which industrial sociology has played in bringing issues of power, authority, control and class into sharp focus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

‘This paper provides an overview of aspects of the history of British sociology. In particular, it tries to answer critical historical work by among others, Perry Anderson and Philip Abrams, which sought to explain the supposed indigenous ‘failure’ to develop academic sociology in Britain before the 1960s. It is argued that a narrowly academic reading of the history of sociology cannot do justice to its role in the service of social administration and public enlightenment and may exaggerate the degree to which sociology from its foundations was conceived as a purely intellectual discipline. The paper points to a thriving sociological culture in Britain in the generation before the First World War, though it was one in which many contributions came from philosophers, natural scientists and political economists rather then self-proclaimed ‘sociologists’. It ends with a brief review of Patrick Geddes and Victor Branford, a founder of the Sociological Society and editor of the Sociological Review, whose biographies and eclectic social and international interests tell us something about the personalities and political interests of early British sociological pioneers.’ [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Alan Fox is one of the most prolific and original British sociologists of industry and employment. Fox's largely derivative writings on macro-sociology have received considerable attention in the literature. In comparison his original micro-sociological theory of the role played by trust in organizational integration has been neglected. This paper presents a critical evaluation of Fox's microsociological theory of 'trust dynamics' in organizations. The paper identifies conceptual, theoretical and methodological weaknesses in Fox's complex argument and concludes that Fox's theory is invalid. The paper also suggests that trust in organizational life is probably more significant as an aspect of 'social integration' than, as Fox contends, as an aspect of' 'system integration'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper introduces and reviews the use of focus group methodology across the social sciences, identifying three different research traditions within which it has been used. It examines some key considerations affecting the use of focus groups, and highlights three central features of focus group research: providing access to participants' own language, concepts and concerns; encouraging the production of more fully articulated accounts; and offering an opportunity to observe the process of collective sense-making in action. Finally, the paper outlines some of the issues in the analysis of focus group data-an area with considerable potential for future development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The authors explore the under-researched area of post-decision evaluation in PPPs (public–private partnerships), focusing upon how and whether Post-decision Project Evaluation (PdPE) is considered and provided for in United Kingdom (UK) public infrastructure projects. Design/methodology/approach: The authors' research design sought insights from overviewing UK PPP planning and more focused exploration of PPP operational practice. The authors combine the extensive analysis of planning documents for operational UK PPP projects with interviews of different stakeholders in PPP projects in one city. Mobilising an open critical perspective, documents were analysed using ethnographic content analysis (ECA) and interviews were analysed using thematic analysis consistent therewith. The authors theorise the absence and ambiguities of PdPE drawing on the sociology of ignorance. Findings: The authors find a long-standing absence and lack of PdPE in PPP projects throughout planning and operational practice, reflecting a dynamic, multi-faceted ignorance. Concerning planning practice, the authors' documentary analysis evidences a trend in PdPE from its absence in the early years (which may indicate some natural or genuine ignorance) to different levels or forms of weak inclusion later. Regarding this inclusion, the authors find strategic ignorance played a substantive role, involving "deliberate engineering" by both public sector and private partners. Interview findings indicate lack of clarity over PdPE and its under-development in PPP practice, deficiencies again suggestive of natural and strategic ignorance. Originality/value: The authors draw from the sociology of ignorance vis-à-vis accounting's absence and ambiguity in the context of PPP, contributing to an under-researched area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports on a project following up previous work about patterns of and attitudes to assessment among sociologists. Two forms of data collection were undertaken: an online questionnaire to sociology departments and a series of focus groups with undergraduate students. The results showed that assessment has become a more salient issue than ten years ago, but that most of the innovations in practice had taken place in post-1992 institutions. The focus group findings confirm those from national satisfaction surveys; namely that student dissatisfaction with assessment is profound and that it persists throughout their undergraduate experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper revisits sociological studies of Liverpool between 1956 and 1964 to challenge the prevailing emphasis on affluence in histories of post-war Britain. Vulnerability to poverty continued to shape working-class life, and the sociologists and their respondents drew on class to account for this. However, while the researchers used class as a social description, their respondents suggested that class was a dynamic social relationship within which they operated a degree of agency, albeit mediated by gender and locale. Their agency was not only facilitated by the development of a post-war welfare state, rather than by personal affluence, but also relied on older household economic strategies that highlight continuities with the pre-war period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reviews the development of nursing in Britain in the light of an assumption that professional groups will seek to gain autonomy and control over others. Such an assumption is familiar to sociologists who tend also to argue that autonomy and control are gained via the creation of dependency. It is shown here that nurses have pursued a different occupational strategy, elements of which include subordination to doctors, acceptance of a wide range of tasks, and, in particular, routinization of their work. A range of reasons, both historical and contemporary, are suggested for this. Although not necessarily recognized in the form described here, the strategy of nursing is a coherent solution to a particular set of circumstances and eventualities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the Second World War, considerable attention has been focused by sociologists on the processes associated with the rehousing of families on council estates on the periphery of large towns. Parallel with this has been a growing interest in the residential mobility of middle-class spiralists. The number of households owning rather than renting in Great Britain today has risen to about fifty per cent. from a figure of around ten per cent at the turn of the century. In a generation, the proportion owning has risen from a quarter to a half. All the indications are that it will continue to grow, encouraged as it is by all the major political parties. The social effects of this change on the families concerned remain unexplored. This paper sets out to investigate the life-style of manual workers and their families on new owner occupied estates, and to compare them in a number of respects with their non-manual neighbors, and with an equivalent group of manual workers in new council houses.

There was a dramatic turning point in the sociological career of Leonard Hobhouse. It occurred about the close of the first decade of his tenure of the Martin White Chair. But before speaking of that, something must be said as to how Hobhouse came into the sociological movement. His passage from the Oxford tradition of political philosophy, and the somewhat arid field of Teutonic epistemology, marked by the publication in 1901 of the book "Mind in Evolution," was no doubt deflected in a more sociological direction during the following years, when preparations were being made for the public launching of the Sociological Society in 1903. A public meeting was held in June, 1903, for considering ways and means to launch the projected Society, Hobhouse warmly seconded a resolution, moved by sociologist Oscar Browning, for the appointment of a committee to formulate the scope and aims of the Society and to draft its constitution. Hobhouse became an active member of the formative committee whose Report, having been accepted without amendment at the first general meeting of members, may be taken as the substantive basis of the sociological movement in Great Britain.

The development of citizenship studies and changes in citizenship is examined between 1945 and 2022 with special reference to Britain. Although the idea of citizenship was established as early as Greek political thought, the development of citizenship based on a welfare state starts in Britain with post-war legislation on education, health, and welfare. The early sociology of citizenship was the work of T. H. Marshall in Britain and Ralf Gustav Dahrendorf in Germany. These two sociologists established a vocabulary and research agenda that has remained influential including basic concepts such as social citizenship, civility, life chances, and public cultures. The post-war settlement in Britain that involved a strategy for the reform of capitalism began to come apart during the Thatcher Years (1979–1990) in which neo-liberalism became the dominant political-economic paradigm. This period saw the creation of 'casino capitalism', the erosion of the welfare state or in Thatcher's words 'the Nanny State'. Whereas citizenship in the twentieth century was based on notions of sameness and solidarity, citizenship studies have to address increasing social and cultural diversity, a global refugee crisis, the relationship between social and human rights, a demographic crisis, and above all the erosion of citizenship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Victor Branford was a central figure in the institutional development of British sociology in the first thirty years of the twentieth century. He is, however, a neglected figure and little is known about his life and his work in sociology. This article presents a biographical account of Victor Branford and outlines his sociological ideas. Particular attention is given to the part played by Branford and his second wife, Sybella Gurney, in the establishment of the Sociological Society and The Sociological Review. Writing between 1903 and 1930, he set out a distinctive view of the nature of sociology and an account of modernity, which he saw as underpinning a conception of a third way in politics that goes beyond capitalism and socialism. He tied this view, set out in the years after the First World War, to a conception of the public role of sociology in which the sociologist was to be a leading element in the building of social citizenship through social reconstruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comments on a research paper by social scientist Judith Green on the connection between professionalism and community. Analysis of the relevance of what it means to be a professional sociologist in the current context and the relationship of these sociologists to those who participate in their research; View that the professionals involved in the provision of health, education, welfare, and recreation services in New Zealand are less likely to live and work in the communities they serve in the country as well as in Great Britain; Opinion that there is a significant gap between aspirations and practice among professionals in New Zealand.

This article responds to Sara Delamont's paper in the February 2000 edition of Sociology which provides an account of the relationship between the sub-discipline, sociology of education, and parent discipline, sociology. Delamont argues that the hooligan is an anomalous beast for sociologists of education, who paradoxically revere him: while the sociology of education is an anomalous beast for the parent discipline, whose practitioners reject and fear it. Essentially, according to the author, the latter part of Delamont's argument amounts to the claim that the wider discipline of sociology has neglected sociology of education. The author notes that in this article, his response is concerned with Delamont's unsatisfactory characterization of British sociology of education. According to Delamont, sociology in Great Britain has two grand narratives, both male--one derived from the political arithmetic tradition is quantitative, empirical and focused on social mobility, and the other discursive and focused on anti-heroes: the portrayal of the rebellion or resistance of the hooligan. Delamont has attempted to characterize British ethnographic studies, which include some reference to anti-school/delinquent boys, and which have been conducted by male sociologists, as falling into the same category.

Housing has featured strongly in the debate concerning the stratificactory significance of consumption-sector cleavages. Housing, as a consumption necessity, has been a central feature of this debate from the time that sociologist Friedrich Engels attempted to demonstrate the determining influence of class in English housing in 1844. At the time that Engels was writing, most housing in Great Britain was privately rented. The social relations of housing embodied in the landlord-tenant relationship at a time when housing was sold as a commodity on a market largely unfettered by regulation were relatively simply constituted then, but have been considerably complicated since by the introduction of large-scale directly subsidized public housing and the growth of indirectly subsidized owner-occupation. Thus, to return to the discussion to the development of the British housing market, what has to be explained relates not so much to the fact that housing tenure currently cross-cuts the social class classification, but rather the process whereby the labour aristocracy have been absorbed into consumption locations which historically have been more often associated with the upper and middle classes. This involves the study of the processes whereby individuals gain access to particular consumption sector locations.

This article contrasts the use of ethnographic research procedures in the study of schools in Great Britain and the U.S. It also reflects on differences between the anthropology and the sociology of education. In the course of this exploration the authors also hope to draw together much of the literature from the respective countries and disciplinary fields. There is an obvious and striking difference between British and U.S. school ethnography. Whereas the U.S. research on schools and classrooms has been conducted primarily by applied anthropologists, that in Great Britain has been done overwhelmingly by researchers who see themselves as sociologists. It is noticeable that several researchers working as sociologists were trained as anthropologists or began work in anthropology departments. Where British research has looked to North America it has been to U.S. sociology in genera--especially symbolic interactionism and ethnomethodology. The article also attempts to establish that the Atlantic really does divide school ethnographers into differing traditions. It establishes the truth of the authors' claim that school and classroom ethnography in the U.S. and Canada is predominantly anthropological in orientation, while that in Great Britain is more sociological.

In recent years ergonomist and industrial sociologists have found considerable common ground in the study of the impact of technological change on work. The former have been concerned mainly with the ways in which new technologies affect the activities and skill requirements of the individual worker and with studies of newly emerging man-machine systems. The latter have turned their attention more to the impact of technological change at the level of the total organizational system and on the occupational structure of industrial society. Conceptions of skill and ideas about levels of skill are highly relevant to both lines of enquiry, but in bringing the two approaches together a problem arises, in that 'skill' as defined for the purposes of ergonomics research is something different from 'skill' as an element in the social structure of a manufacturing plant or the occupational structure of an industrial society. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the existence of two sets of ideas about skills, to show how they relate to each other in occupational life, and to examine the implications for technical progress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Those students who were among the first sociology graduates in the UK barely feature in standard histories of the discipline, which all have an intellectual and institutional focus. This article remedies this neglect by researching the social backgrounds and later careers of sociology graduates from the London School of Economics and Political Science [LSE] and Bedford College for Women from the first such graduate in 1907 until those graduating in the 1930s. Data for this exercise were compiled from a variety of sources. The more important are: UK censuses, especially that of 1911; various civil registration records; archived student files; and, for the graduates who entered university teaching, issues of the Yearbook of the Universities of the Empire [later the Commonwealth Universities' Yearbook]. The dataset includes all identified graduates in the BSc(Econ), Special Subject Sociology, degree from 1907 to 1935 and all in the BA (Honours) in Sociology degree from 1925 to 1939. LSE sociology graduates tended to be older and to have more cosmopolitan backgrounds, with fathers more likely than for Bedford College graduates to come from commercial rather than professional backgrounds. Both institutions' graduates' careers tended to the Civil Service and local government. LSE graduates gravitated to education, especially to higher education if male, whilst those of Bedford College went into welfare work, countering a stereotype from some previous literature that especially women graduates were heavily constrained to follow careers in schoolteaching. The article also gives comparisons with the social-class profile and career destinations of several cohorts of postwar sociology graduates, noting a number of similarities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents a commentary on a paper by Robert A. Stebbins in a previous issue of The American Sociologist which provided an account of professional and amateur sociology in the U.S. The British organization, Mass Observation existed in a relatively nonintrusive society with (as compared to the U.S.) greater concern for one's own and other people's privacy. Canada and Great Britain may in this respect have more built-in defenses against the risks of some kinds of amateur sociology that the U.S. would have. However, according to the commenter, Stebbins already anticipates this objection by requiring amateurs to be supervised and to start with a certain amount of instruction and proper cautionary comments. By engaging primarily in the use of unobtrusive measures and observations, the amateur will avoid the risks of harm to which Stebbins is already sensitive. The commenter relates that one of the public areas in which he has encouraged such unobtrusive observations is in churches, where the observer in outward appearance is similar to the congregation and hence not seen as an intruder. According to him, he has had a fair amount of experience with undergraduate amateurs of the sort described.

This article argues for a public sociology of ‘race’ that can respond to Weber's injunction that sociology should ‘meet the demands of the day’. While the author's version of these demands – for a society of autonomous individuals and groups, living as equals – is utopian, the main argument offered here is that a sociology of ‘race’ should be a modified version of Burawoy's ‘public sociology’. Adopting Bauman's notion of a sociology of interpreters, a further suggestion is that this type of sociology needs to be reflexive and affective. Based on an analysis of his own sociological education in the late 1960s, his participation in social and political movements in which ‘race’ was key, and with brief reference to the sociology of ‘race’, the author argues that the emotions that circulated in each arena need to be examined, acknowledged and incorporated if theoretical and practical progress is to be made. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Few sociologists dissent from the notion that the mid- to late 1970s witnessed a shift in capitalism’s modus operandi. Its association with a rapid increase of social and material inequality is beyond dispute. This article opens with a brief summation of contemporary British trends in economic inequalities, and finds an echo of these trends in health inequalities. It is suggested that the sociology of health inequalities in Britain lacks an analysis of agency, and that such an analysis is crucial. A case is made that the recent critical realist contribution of Margaret Archer on ‘internal conversations’ lends itself to an understanding of agency that is salient here. The article develops her typology of internal conversations to present characterizations of the ‘focused autonomous reflexives’ whose mind-sets are causally efficacious for producing and reproducing inequalities, and the ‘dedicated meta-reflexives’ whose casts of mind might yet predispose them to mobilize resistance to inequalities. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article examines the 'canonical' status achieved in recent British sociology by four writers: Zygmunt Bauman, Ulrich Beck, Pierre Bourdieu and Anthony Giddens. Along with other key thinkers of the later 20th century such as Foucault and Habermas, these four sociologists, from different geographical and theoretical bases, transformed the shape of British sociology and its relation to social theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author discusses the origins, histories and traditions of photographic education in Great Britain. He notes that the transformation brought about by digital technology on photographic modes of production, circulation and consumption is changing the landscape of photography. The author asserts that the photographic figure has become the site of converging interests of anthropologists, historians, sociologists and scholars in cultural studies. Moreover, he emphasizes the need for photography educators to indicate the difficulties of photography.

The anti-‘death tax’ movement is the starting point for contemporary discussions of inheritance taxation. The political rhetoric surrounding calls for its repeal typically is met with analyses of the extent to which inheritance tax avoidance benefits the wealthy, and arguments that inheritance taxation is fair and ‘targeted’. This article suggests that engagement by tax lawyers with sociological theories of economic inheritance has the potential to revive this discourse. A renewed approach to inheritance taxation is of immediate concern to supporters of inheritance taxation in the United Kingdom, who face considerable obstacles posed by the increasing use of United States anti-inheritance tax movement political rhetoric by politicians. Durkheim's consideration of the conjugal family and, more recently, Beckert's sociology of inheritance are submitted as analyses that, amongst others, have particular potential. Such engagement also has the potential to revive the interest of sociologists in inheritance taxation, memorably described by MacNamee and Miller as a ‘sociological lacuna.’ [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines UK national press coverage of criminology and criminologists for the twelve months up to April 2005. In part it replicates work done on sociology and sociologists in the previous year by Gaber (2005) . Both serious and by the bye contributions by criminologists and mentions of criminology – favourable and unfavourable – are analysed, to provoke discussion within criminology and criminal justice studies about how the discipline is viewed by the print media. The discussion draws on developments in sociology around ‘public sociology’ and suggests the necessity of, and ways forward for, ‘public criminology’. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the relationship between theology and sociology on two levels. The first is in terms of the general disciplinary closure that has marked much of their coexistence, despite the many topics on which they potentially meet. The second level is more specific and concerns the tension in Britain between religious sociology, in which sociology is put to serve faith, and the secular sociology of religion, where religion is studied scientifically. This tension has been addressed before with respect to the history of sociology in France and the United States, but the British case, hitherto relatively unknown, illustrates the potential there was for a more fruitful relationship between sociology and theology in Britain that went undeveloped as the secular sociology of religion eventually replaced early religious sociology. The existence of religious sociology has been written out of the history of the discipline in Britain, such that when theology and sociology began a more serious engagement in the 1970s in Britain and elsewhere, particularly as biblical studies discovered sociology and as theologians and sociologists first met jointly, this earlier dialogue was entirely overlooked. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents an interview with sociologist Joseph Gusfield in Great Britain. Gusfield elaborated on how he develop an interest in drunk driving. He also mentioned his educational background and career history. In addition, Gusfield featured his book "Symbolic Crusade: Status Politics and the American Temperance Movement" during the interview.

The British Sociological Association (BSA) was founded when British sociology was very small, but it grew rapidly as higher education expanded, and many BSA activities responded to this. Membership has always been open. In the 1950s, younger members wanted more professionalization, and founded a separate group for 'professional sociologists'; this soon became a section of the BSA, and then was closed as no longer needed. Other groups too which had felt their interests required independence have been absorbed. The professionalizing group took over the leadership, only to be challenged in turn by the women's movement; this made gender issues salient, and led to a policy of gender equality. The politicized period of the late 1960s and 1970s, student unrest, and governmental attacks on the social sciences, created many issues which involved the BSA. Internally, policy was egalitarian on several fronts; some senior men objected to this. Activities have grown considerably, and include journals, conferences, codes of practice, study groups, an academic press and a summer school; recently it has also often been necessary to represent sociology in relation to governmental initiatives for higher education. The external environment is now quieter and the discipline has become older and more established, but despite increased professionalization the BSA remains egalitarian and inclusive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A research project undertaken for the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) in 1980-1 is seen as representative of a trend towards contract research and of the problems this creates for sociologists. The project entailed an examination of the 'housing needs' of the Authority's tenants in fled houses m the North of Scotland. It is suggested that the UKAEA was less interested in forecasts of housing needs than in 'expert' identification of trends with which the Authority was already familiar. The 'experts'' final report would then be used by the UKAEA to ease the progress of Authority policy in a sensitive area. The research contract did not inevitably produce a study which could be used by the UKAEA as a cosmetic but the Authority directed the research to this end. Nevertheless, the project did produce contacts and opportunities for independent research which would have been inaccessible. An example is given m the form of an account of the UKAEA's housing policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the relationship between town planning, urban planners and sociology in Great Britain from the 19th century through the early 1980s, with a particular focus on the post World War II period. An overview of the impact that post World War II British politics played in the increasing role of sociologists in urban planning, including in regard to sociologists' role in urban research, is provided.

The view is widely held amongst sociologists and political scientists and also expressed in the mass media that Great Britain is a very effective, stable, liberal democracy. It has long been blessed by a high degree of political integration, of which the broad consensus on the Constitution and on policies, is only the most remarkable instance. The theme around which their interpretations turn is the identification of what is thought to be the mixture of attitudes and orientations that characterises British political culture. Whilst all the studies mentioned, can be faulted in varying degrees on methodological grounds' as well as on substantive points of interpretation, their analyses have gained widespread support, and even acclaim, amongst academics. Indeed, the view of British life that they present has until recently remained virtually unchallenged. More recently, an alternative interpretation of the data presented in these and other studies has been suggested: This heterodox account contends that the political stability of liberal democracies is not underpinned by normative consensus as was previously assumed, but rather that it rests upon the pragmatic acceptance by the lower class of existing arrangements.

This article focuses on the emergence of two different traditions in the sociology of science in the U.S. and Great Britain, the differences resulting from the different backgrounds and professional functions of the sociologists of science in the two countries. In Great Britain, sociology of science is much younger and has had a history very different from that in the United States. British sociologists of science have been much more concerned with critical evaluation of existing research and with attempts at creating a sociology of scientific knowledge. On the whole, they have been critical of structural functional analysis, and their view of science has tended to be much more realistic than in the United States. American tradition preceded the British one, and part of the difference between them is probably due to the fact that the British tradition emerged at a time when the American tradition was in a state of transition and when structural functionalism was also being strongly criticized in the United States.

This article attempts to indicate both the diversity of substance and the diversity of approach, which characterize sociological studies of blue-collar workers in Great Britain. The discussion hinges on four perspectives, which may be distinguished in the relevant sociological literature: 1. Institutional Empiricism; 2. Systems Analysis; 3. Social Action Studies; 4. Reference Group Analysis. These perspectives are sufficiently clear to justify organizing the discussion around them, but it should be emphasized that they are not necessarily to be seen as mutually exclusive categories Sociologists see in fact that sometimes two perspectives may be consciously utilized by an author in a mutually supportive way. They further see that sometimes the answer to a problem of research strategy posed from the standpoint of different perspectives may lead in practice to an unexpected convergence as between different writers. What has to be recognized here is that the occupational community serves as an important membership and reference group in explaining the continued working class identification. To describe these workers as privatized would, therefore, be misleading. This suggests that the occupation itself needs to be treated as a variable in assessing the extent to which one can talk of normative convergence between the working and middle classes. It provides an analytical point of contact with the work of Scott et al who, as was noted above, treated occupation as a social system variable in their attempts to explain blue-collar worker behavior.

Agriculture in general and agricultural workers in particular have mainly aroused the interest of sociologists in this country in the context of rural community studies. Unfortunately these studies have by no means dealt with a representative sample of the different types of agriculture carried out in Great Britain, so that a very uneven representation has emerged. This article outlines the approach followed in a study of a particular group of deferential workers-agricultural workers-which the writer is currently undertaking in East Anglia. The emphasis is dynamic rather than static, for it will be argued that significant changes within the overall class situation of agricultural workers have taken place in recent years. Indeed the 'second agricultural revolution' has altered the components of their class situation in certain very important ways. Examining how far these changes have imposed strains on the agricultural workers' deferential image of society should enable an assessment of their relative importance to be made.

Over the past two decades, sociologists in this country have given a great deal of attention to studies of the manual working class, and to the 'new' middle class, but they have paid less heed to the upper echelons of the class structure. In the first place, on the general level, the study of social class has always been closely linked to the analysis of 'power' or 'domination'; and this is an area which can hardly be adequately understood if only one side of the coin is examined the 'subordinate' classes. Secondly, and more specifically, the fate of the British 'ruling class' is of special significance historically and sociologically, since Great Britain was the 'cradle of the Industrial Revolution', and the first 'industrial society' the world has known. This supposed transformation is usually portrayed as part of a generalized process of `decomposition' of class relationships as they existed in nineteenth century capitalism. One pole of this argument concerns the lower levels of the class structure, whereby the `traditional' working class is presumed to have become internally fragmented or diversified, and the boundaries separating it from the white collar `middle class' blurred or dissolved altogether.

This article focuses on the contributions of sociologist Patrick Geddes, as the profession celebrates the centenary of his birth in 1954. Geddes was deeply moved by the social condition of the poor in 19th century Great Britain. His application for the chair of Botany at the Edinburgh University, Scotland, was rejected, apparently because of his active interest in social problems. The development of Geddes Town Planning was to come, and in these years, he was primarily the expositor of ideas of social structure and welfare. Geddes was deeply moved by the social condition of the poor in nineteenth-century Great Britain. One of the most fundamental elements of thinker Charles Darwin's thought was that living beings and their environments made up a whole that to separate them and discuss influences of heredity and environment apart was to go astray into artificial abstractions, and on this truth Geddes seized with enthusiasm. Geddes had a very strong urge to spread his ideas, and he was one of the first to organize summer schools and vacation courses especially to give teachers the mental refreshment many of them so greatly need if they are to avoid staleness in their very exhausting work.

Michael Young (1915–2002), Lord Young of Dartington, sociologist, ‘social entrepreneur’ and originator of dozens of organisations, was a prominent figure in many areas of British life in the latter half of the twentieth century. On 14 January 2004, to mark the second anniversary of his death and the deposition of his archives at Churchill College, Cambridge, a conference was held at which Peter Hennessy, Martin Daunton, Pat Thane, Hilary Perraton and Matthew Hilton were invited to assess Young's contribution to different aspects of contemporary British life. Their presentations are published here in this special section devoted to Michael Young, together with a foreword by his biographer, Lord Asa Briggs. The editors of Contemporary British History wish to thank the Churchill Archives Centre, and particularly Allen Packwood, for enabling this event to take place. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the sociology of education. According to the author, most of the present generation of sociologists of education in Britain commenced their study of the discipline at a time when it was informed by a major consideration of the inequalities of social class. Sociologists and theologists share the gospel that the poor will always be with them, together with a reality of changing situations and definitions and with varying levels of interest and involvement. Some would argue that the cutting edge of the discipline has consequently been dulled, and that the more macro political dimensions of the analysis of education and society have been put aside in favour of smaller practical research questions. At the same time, interest in inequality in education can be seen to have both broadened and deepened. The analysis of social class relations in education has been challenged and extended by research on gender and race relations and policy makers have developed an interest in formulating equal opportunity or equality policies in education in these areas. Sociological analyses of education have in the last decade encompassed many more aspects of schooling. Within an era of economic recession and dominance of monetarist values, ideologies so much part of the educational consensus, such as the concept of equal opportunity, have been reframed and pushed to one side.