European Academic Community as a Political Actor: Historical Evolution and Institutional Foundations

The article examines the evolution of the European academic community as a distinct political actor. The recent political studies are characterized by the broadening of the understanding of actorness. It is attributed not only to transnational corporations and other non-state organizations, but also to epistemic communities (which represent associations based on the common knowledge). Therefore, groups of scholars in cases when they are represented by designated institutions, acting on their behalf and engaged in political process, could also be seen as actors. In order to define European academic community as an international political actor it is essential to identify organizations acting on its behalf similarly to the national associations representing groups of scientists within individual countries. Institutions of scientific policy of the European Union emerged as such organizations. The rise of this policy was defined by an attempt not only to form a transnational community of scientists, but also to set it against national academic communities within the EU Member-States. It was supplemented by the expansion of the American model of production of the organization of science. Those academics which attempted to operate in transnational environment of the EU appeared to be more open to the practices imported from the United States.

Currently the European structures of the support of academic activity are integrated in the European research community. The latter becomes a major pillar for scientists predominantly associated with other transnational actors, which characterize them as the most globalized part of the academic population. The article localize, therefore, European research community as a group  of  specialists,  who  possess  their distinct interests; retain the widest connections with global economy; rely on their own institutional structures; and elaborate their own discourse, related to the “knowledge economy”.

1. Baikov A.A. (2014). “Soobshchestva identichnosti” v usloviiah mezhstranovoi integratsii [“Identity Communities” in the Conditions of Cross-Country Integration] [Elektronnyi resurs] // Informatsionnyi gumanitarnyi portal “Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie”. №1. Available at: http://www.zpu-journal.ru/ezpu/2014/1/Baykov_Identity-Communities/

2. Baikov A., Istomin I. Sovremennye osobennosti otechestvennyh I zarubezhnyh nauchnyh zhurnalov [Russian and International Publication Practices]// // Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. 2015. No. 2. P. 114-140.

3. Balyshev A.V., Konnov V.I. (2016). Global’naya nauka i natsional’nye nauchnye kul’tury: Trudnosti soprayzheniay [Global academia and national research cultures: points of contention] // Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. No. 3. P. 96-111.

4. Blinov A.N., Talagaeva D.A. (2014). Nauchnoe soobshchestvo kak politicheskii actor: Rol’ mezhdunarodnyh nauchnyh ob’’edinenii [Scientific Community as a Political Actor: The Role of International Scientific Associations] // Politiia. №1. P.174-183.

5. Vodianitskaia E.A. (2012). Regulirovanie ekspertizy nauchnyh proektov v Nemetskom nauchnoissledovatel’skom soobshchestve [Peer Review Regulation in the German Science and Research Association] // Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta. № 5. P. 227-234.

6. Danilin V.A. Sovremennaya nauchno-tehnicheskaya politika SSHA: instrumenty I osnovnye napravleniya [Modern US research policy: instruments and trends], 2011, M.IMEMO RAN, P.140.

7. Kaarbo J., Beasley R. (2002). Primenenie sravnitel’nogo metoda case study v politicheskoi psikhologii [A practical guide to comparative study method in political psychology] // Politicheskay psikhologia / ed. by E.B. Shestopal. Moscow: Infra-M.

8. Kasatkin P.I., Talagaeva D.A. CERN I EVRATOM kak modeli nadnatsionalinyh struktur [CERN and Euratom as supranational structures] //Etnosotsium i mezhnatsionalinaya kultura. 2016, #12 (102) , P.120-124.

9. Konnov V.I. (2007). Natsional’nye fondy podderzhki nauki kak forma nauchnogo samoupravleniia // Vlast’. № 9. P. 25-29.

10. Konnov V.I. (2009). O gosudarstvennyh nauchnyh fondah // Rossiiskii ekonomicheskii zhurnal, 2009. № 6. P. 95-101.

11. Lebedeva M.M. (2013). Aktory sovremennoi mirovoi politiki: trendy razvitiia [Actors of Contemporary World Politics: Trends of Development] // Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta. №1. P. 38-42.

12. Talagaeva D.A. Formirovanie Evropeiskogo nauchnogo prostranstva: podhody skandinavskih stran [ The Emergence of the European Research Area: the Approaches of the Scandinavian Countries] // Avtoreferat dissertatsii na soiskanie uchenoi stepeni kandidata politicheskih nauk. M: MGIMO, 2016.

13. Talagaeva D.A. Norvegiya: gosudarstvennaya nauchnaya politika [Norway: State Sceince Policy]// Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya. #1. 2014. P.155-165.

14. Torkunov A.V. Rossiiskie VUZy v protsesse internatsionalizatsii: vyzovy I prioritety [Internationalization of a University as a Challenge] // Mezhdunarodnye protsessy, #1, 2017, P.6-12.

15. Iurevich A.V. (2015). Imeet li nauka natsional’nye osobennosti? [Does Science Have National Peculiarities?] // Psihologicheskii zhurnal. № 1. P. 123-132.

16. Breschi S., Cusmano L. (2004). Unveiling the Texture of a European Research Area: Emergence of Oligarchic Networks under EU Framework Programmes // International Journal of Technology Management. Vol. 27, No. 8. P. 747-772.

17. Council of the European Communities. (1987). "Decision of the Council of 28 September 1987 concerning the framework programme 1987-1991", Annex III // Official Journal of the European Communities.

18. Cronin D. (2013). Corporate Europe. London: Pluto Press.

19. European Commission. (2012). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A Reinforced European Research Area Partnership for Excellence and Growth. Brussels. COM (2012) 392 final.

20. Commission of the European Communities. (2000). Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social committee and the Committee of the Regions. Towards a European research area. Brussels. COM(2000) 6 final.

21. The European Union and universities: The central role of knowledge. URL: http://www.leru.org/index.php/ public/news/the-european-union-and-universities-the-central-role-of-knowledge/

22. Gibbons M., Limoges C., Nowotny H., Schwartzman S., Scott P., Trow M. (1994). The Production of Knowledge. London: Sage.

23. Haas P. (2001). Policy knowledge: Epistemic communities // International encylclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences / ed. by Smelser N., Baltes P. Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.

24. Holzner B., Marx J. (1979). Knowledge application: The knowledge system in society. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. P. 107-111.

25. Kauppinen I. (2013). Academic Capitalism and the Informational Fraction of the Transnational Capitalist Class // Globalization, Societies and Education. Vol. 11. P. 1-22.

26. Kauppinen I. (2012). Towards Transnational Academic Capitalism // Higher Education. Vol. 64. P. 543-556.

27. Keohane R.O., Nye J.S. (1971). Transnational relations and world politics: An introduction. // International Organization. Vol. 25, No. 3. P. 329-349.

28. Krige J. (2006). American Hegemony and the Postwar Reconstruction of Science in Europe. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press. P. 4-9.

29. Nowotny H., Scott P., Gibbons M. (2001). Re-thinking Science. Cambridge: Polity Press.

30. Rhoades G., Sporn B. (2002). New models of management and shifting modes and costs of production:

31. Europe and the United States // Tertiary Education and Management. No. 8. P. 3-28.

32. Robinson W. (2004). A Theory of Global Capitalism. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.

33. Rosenau J. Turbulence in world politics: A theory of change and continuity. Princeton University Press, 1990.

34. Siepmann T.J. (2004). The Global Exportation of the U.S. Bayh-Dole Act // University of Dayton Law Review. Vol. 30, Issue 2. P. 209-243.

35. Sklair L. (2001). The Transnational Capitalist Class. London: Oxford: Blackwell.

36. Slaughter S., Cantwell B. (2012). Transatlantic Moves to the Market: The United States and the European Union // Higher Education. No. 5. P. 583-603.

37. Slaughter S., Leslie L. (1997). Academic Capitalism. Politics, Policies and the Entrepreneurial University. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.

38. Slaughter S., Rhoades G. (2003). Academic Capitalism and the New Economy. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.

39. Touraine A. (2000). A method for studying social actors // Journal of World-Systems Research. VI, 3.