This page is under construction
PANELS
Helena Catt, Department of Political Studies University
of Auckland
Will we make it to the centenary?
As we celebrate the jubilee of the study of politics this paper considers
the future and asks if political scientists have enough in common for the discipline
to endure for another fifty years. The sense of disciplinary cohesion has been
weak in the past and administrative changes in most Universities have blurred
departmental titles and identities. The success of politics departments has
been reflected in growth in staff numbers but it may be that such success sows
the seeds of division as political scientists become increasingly specialised.
Traditionally the study of politics unites around an interest in power and the
state but is this still a component of all that we call political science? Are
there central texts that all students of politics know about and do we have
a common methodology or approach? If the answer to all of these questions is
'no' then what makes politics a discipline? This paper seeks to raise questions
rather than furnish solutions but is intended to stimulate discussion rather
than induce despondency.
Email: h.catt@auckland.ac.nz
Michael Crozier, Department of Political Science, University
of Melbourne
Political times and intellectual tides: The Australasian
Political Studies Association archive
It is customary in jubilee years to celebrate achievements. Often mere perseverance
emerges as the most notable of these. The Australasian Political Studies Association
has certainly endured though some may ask why and how. It has not had a strong
role in the professional gatekeeping of the practice of political studies in
the academy or beyond. The sense of disciplinary cohesion has been weak. Many
a common research program seems to have developed with little sense of obligation
to the association as a necessary scholarly conduit. According to these type
of criteria, APSA hardly seems to meet the necessary threshold of a professional
disciplinary association. The question then becomes what has persisted? This
paper will pursue this question, surveying APSA archive materials such as official
publications and newsletters, periodical membership surveys, annual conferences
papers and assorted documents. The paper will situate the archival profile within
the wider political-intellectual climate, exploring the interrelationship between
intellectual developments-domestically and internationally-and political and
social shifts and trends. A working hunch of the paper is that the 'loose ties'
of the association may be one of its enduring strengths in the Antipodean context.
Email: mcrozier@unimelb.edu.au
Carol Johnson, Politics Department University of Adelaide
Australian political science and the study of discourse
This paper argues that the study of political discourse, in its various forms
and taking various approaches, has become an increasingly useful aspect of Australian
political science. That development, in turn, is related to a "discursive shift",
associated with the influence of neo-liberalism, that has taken place in Australian
government discourse and that has challenged previous understandings of Australian
political thought. As well, the increasing study of political discourse has
been influenced by the impact of interdisciplinary approaches such as post-structuralist,
postmodernist, feminist, queer, critical theory and postcolonial analyses. Such
analyses can generate very useful insights. However, this paper also argues
that one of the strengths of Australian political scientists' use of discursive
approaches is that they are largely seen as merely supplementing more traditional
approaches to the study of politics.
Email: carol.johnson@adelaide.edu.au
Peter McCarthy, Australian National University
Political science at the ANU's Research School of Social
Sciences: The early years
This paper provides a context for five major publications from the earlier years
of the Political Science Department in the Australian National University's
Research School of Social Sciences. These works, all loosely categorised as
electoral studies, were: Leicester Webb's Communism and Democracy (1954); Henry
Mayer and Joan Rydon's The Gwydir By-Election (1954); Don Rawson and Susan Holtzinger's
Politics in Eden-Monaro (1958); Don Rawson's Australia Votes (1961); and Don
Aitkin's Stability and Change in Australian Politics (first ed., 1977). Starting
from an examination of the character of these works-the specific problems each
set out to address and the methodologies adopted-the context for these works
can be identified by exploring their institutional background and disciplinary
location. The institutional background includes Webb's ambitions for the new
Department and the way in which these ambitions were linked to the larger purposes
of the newly established University. Something can also be learned about the
various authors' educational and professional backgrounds as well as their intellectual
styles, and how these impacted on the works. Examining both Australian and overseas
activities gives an understanding of the wider disciplinary location of these
works. Central to the story of these works is the stated ambition to match existing
British and American approaches, in particular, those found in the Nuffield
Studies and publications of the Survey Research Center at the University of
Michigan. There was also some comparable work being done in other Australian
universities during this period. Finally, critical responses to the five works
can tell us something about what were seen as the needs of political scientists
in Australia and perhaps as well about what the Department achieved in its early
years.
Email: petermc@coombs.anu.edu.au
Rod Rhodes, Politics, University of Newcastle (UK)
'How do we explain ourselves to one another?' Professionalisation
versus traditions in UK political science
The paper has four core arguments.
(1) There are several traditions in British political science: for example,
Professionalism, Idealism and Socialism. Each tradition is alive and vital.
Thus, the Whig tradition is often treated as a hang over from the past but intertwined
with the American tradition it lies at the heart of the Professional tradition
in British political science.
(2) The Professional tradition's narrative about the professionalisation of
British political science seeks to write out other traditions from the history
of the discipline. This goal is promoted both by state policies and funding
and by mainstream political scientists pursuit of state recognition and approval.
(3) British political science is distinctive, differing sharply from American
political science in three ways.
(i) Political scientists in Britain do not believe the subject is
a science.
(ii) Each tradition engages in historical analysis.
(iii) Britain has a strong, differentiated socialist tradition.
(4) Each tradition in British political science changed in response to the dilemmas
posed by both changing intellectual agendas (for example, behaviouralism, Thatcherism)
and changing state agendas (for example, 'the preference for relevance'). However,
there were important differences in their responses.
Email: r.a.w.rhodes@ncl.ac.uk
Joan Rydon
Over forty years in political science
Abstract not currently available
Email: jrydon@mail.ozemail.com.au
Roger Scott, School of Political Science and International
Studies, University of Queensland
The decline of political science within the study of public
administration
The study of government as a unique phenomenon has deep historical roots and
has engaged the attention of philosophers, economists and lawyers throughout
recorded history. Political studies as a separate discipline brought these pre-existing
disciplines into focus. Under American influence, these studies also came to
embrace aspects of human behaviour and to incorporate elements successively
of psychology, social anthropology and sociology. Australian universities roughly
paralleled this trend, with political studies emerging mainly out of departments
of history but closely linked to related studies in law and philosophy. While
"political science" was later to become the dominant title, three of the older
institutions - Sydney, Tasmania and Queensland - adopted the title Government
as the departmental nomenclature. This reflected in part the trend in those
institutions for economists to demonstrate interest in the role of government
and the functioning of governmental institutions. So these three departments
of Government were closely attached to faculties of commerce, maintaining at
least equal partnership with Arts. Over time, there have been powerful moves
within these commerce faculties towards a market-focussed explanation for human
behaviour and a disdain for the capacity of governments to function as efficiently
as market-driven organizations in delivering services. This has led to declining
concern for the unique character of public sector institutions. As a result,
the separate study of public administration has experienced accelerating decline.
The "vocational" appeal of public administration for students realistically
assessing their career prospects has not been sustained in this skeptical environment.
"Management" has emerged as a generic discipline, claiming to solve the ills
of public bureaucracy by adopting the nostrums of the private sector. This has
resulted in the widespread alienation of public administration from its previous
setting in political studies departments. Public sector teachers often end up
on the margins of management schools. Public policy as a study remains awkwardly
poised as a result, sitting as it does on the fulcrum between organizational
and State politics. The separation of politics from administration which was
much debated nearly a century ago has come back to haunt scholars still interested
in such matters and to damage wider understanding of the core processes of democratic
government.
Email: r.scott@qut.edu.au
John Uhr, Political Science, RSSS, Australian National University
Parker's contribution to political studies
This session will be convened by John Uhr to mark the many achievements of Robert
Parker (1915-2002) in the study of politics and public administration. Speakers
will highlight many of Parker's impacts on the political study of public administration,
including such major topics as: contested models of responsible government;
changing doctrines of public service neutrality; the place of new public management;
and preparations for post-colonial governance in Papua New Guinea.
Email: John.Uhr@anu.edu.au
This site maintained by Phil Griffiths. This page updated 18 June 2002