|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It is tempting to oversell the practical value of applied research. A hard look at the effects of U.S. social science on public policy in areas such as active labor market policies (training, job creation, placement, etc.), crime prevention, fiscal policy, poverty reduction, and health care reform suggests an inverse relationship between social science consensus and policy and budgetary decisions. Fragmented and decentralized political economies (e.g., the United States) foster policy segmentation and isolated, short-run single-issue research—often politicized and misleading. More corporatist democracies (such as Sweden, Norway, Austria, and Germany) evidence a tighter relation between knowledge and power in which a wider range of issues is connected, longer-range effects are sometimes considered, and research is more often actually used for planning and implementation. Even in less hospitable societies, however, social science does make its way in the long run. Favorable conditions and examples are discussed.
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
R. Bhatia and M. Katz Estimation of Health Benefits From a Local Living Wage Ordinance Am J Public Health, September 1, 2001; 91(9): 1398 - 1402. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
|
|