Field of Dreams: the discursive construction of EU studies, intellectual dissidence and the practice of ‘normal science’

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

Field of Dreams: the discursive construction of EU studies, intellectual dissidence and the practice of ‘normal science’. / Rosamond, Ben.

In: Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 54, No. 1, 2016, p. 19-36.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Rosamond, B 2016, 'Field of Dreams: the discursive construction of EU studies, intellectual dissidence and the practice of ‘normal science’', Journal of Common Market Studies, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 19-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12334

APA

Rosamond, B. (2016). Field of Dreams: the discursive construction of EU studies, intellectual dissidence and the practice of ‘normal science’. Journal of Common Market Studies, 54(1), 19-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12334

Vancouver

Rosamond B. Field of Dreams: the discursive construction of EU studies, intellectual dissidence and the practice of ‘normal science’. Journal of Common Market Studies. 2016;54(1):19-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12334

Author

Rosamond, Ben. / Field of Dreams: the discursive construction of EU studies, intellectual dissidence and the practice of ‘normal science’. In: Journal of Common Market Studies. 2016 ; Vol. 54, No. 1. pp. 19-36.

Bibtex

@article{b7407bac264446f3b213c949c7ff26c1,
title = "Field of Dreams: the discursive construction of EU studies, intellectual dissidence and the practice of {\textquoteleft}normal science{\textquoteright}",
abstract = "This article explores how and why established understandings of an academic field{\textquoteright}s history matter. In particular, it shows in the case of EU studies that a settled narrative of the pivotal theoretical debate between neofunctionalism and intergovernmentalism has been a vital rhetorical tool in the constitution of the field since the 1990s. Drawing on citation data and contemporaneous accounts of the theoretical architecture of the field from the 1970s and 1980s, the article shows that the idea of an intergovernmentalist school of theory is a retrospective construction developed in the 1980s and 1990s that has been read back into the past of the field of integration studies. The further effects of this settled intersubjective understanding of EU studies past include contribute to the stereotyping and simplification of neofunctionalism, the writing out the field{\textquoteright}s key archive of other mainstream theoretical work and the continued silencing of non-mainstream or {\textquoteleft}dissident{\textquoteright} theoretical voices. ",
keywords = "Faculty of Social Sciences, dissidence, EU studies, intergovernmentalism, disciplinary history",
author = "Ben Rosamond",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1111/jcms.12334",
language = "English",
volume = "54",
pages = "19--36",
journal = "Journal of Common Market Studies",
issn = "0021-9886",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Field of Dreams: the discursive construction of EU studies, intellectual dissidence and the practice of ‘normal science’

AU - Rosamond, Ben

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - This article explores how and why established understandings of an academic field’s history matter. In particular, it shows in the case of EU studies that a settled narrative of the pivotal theoretical debate between neofunctionalism and intergovernmentalism has been a vital rhetorical tool in the constitution of the field since the 1990s. Drawing on citation data and contemporaneous accounts of the theoretical architecture of the field from the 1970s and 1980s, the article shows that the idea of an intergovernmentalist school of theory is a retrospective construction developed in the 1980s and 1990s that has been read back into the past of the field of integration studies. The further effects of this settled intersubjective understanding of EU studies past include contribute to the stereotyping and simplification of neofunctionalism, the writing out the field’s key archive of other mainstream theoretical work and the continued silencing of non-mainstream or ‘dissident’ theoretical voices.

AB - This article explores how and why established understandings of an academic field’s history matter. In particular, it shows in the case of EU studies that a settled narrative of the pivotal theoretical debate between neofunctionalism and intergovernmentalism has been a vital rhetorical tool in the constitution of the field since the 1990s. Drawing on citation data and contemporaneous accounts of the theoretical architecture of the field from the 1970s and 1980s, the article shows that the idea of an intergovernmentalist school of theory is a retrospective construction developed in the 1980s and 1990s that has been read back into the past of the field of integration studies. The further effects of this settled intersubjective understanding of EU studies past include contribute to the stereotyping and simplification of neofunctionalism, the writing out the field’s key archive of other mainstream theoretical work and the continued silencing of non-mainstream or ‘dissident’ theoretical voices.

KW - Faculty of Social Sciences

KW - dissidence

KW - EU studies

KW - intergovernmentalism

KW - disciplinary history

U2 - 10.1111/jcms.12334

DO - 10.1111/jcms.12334

M3 - Journal article

VL - 54

SP - 19

EP - 36

JO - Journal of Common Market Studies

JF - Journal of Common Market Studies

SN - 0021-9886

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 143067356