Main trends of research in the social and human ... - unesdoc - Unesco

606 Pierre de Bie
formed within a problem-focused research institution, such as a development
study institute, a criminology centre or a family studies centre, are in a distinct-
ly privileged position, belonging as they do to a single institutional structure.
In this respect they are far better off than those who, working within a uni-
versity or academy, would like to create multidisciplinary associations because
they see their importance theoretically, but who in fact come up against in-
stitutional barriers in the form of schools, institutes and faculties, all jealous of
their disciplinary independence. Within the university or academy, incentives
to co-operate and exchange ideas may be lacking, or prove to be far less power-
ful than those resulting from the need for joint intellectual efforts in overcoming
a difficulty or executing a plan. This is emphasized by Eric Trist in connexion
with professional schools at university level which, far more than the institutes
or departments on the humanities side, tend to be multi- or interdisciplinary.44
It is not our purpose in this chapter to survey the various possible types of
institutional arrangements in their relation to research, as this question is dealt
with in Chapter XI. But attention should be drawn to scientific affinities condu-
cive to certain multidisciplinary associations rather than others. In one instance
it may be the tradition for demographers to collaborate with sociologists, in
another with economists. Social and cultural anthropology has, in fact, largely
taken over from ethnology, but is much closer to sociology and is intercon-
nected with linguistics. In continental European countries, political science
has for long been particularly preoccupied with constitutional and administra-
tive law; under the influence of Anglo-Saxon research it has broadened its
scope more and more to include the the work of sociologists, social psychologists,
linguists, ethnologists and organization theorists.45 And amongst the sciences
of man it is often sociology and sometimes anthropology that primarily attract
the psychologist. In the European countries the economist is more concerned
with history than sociology; if the latter discipline does have to do with eco-
nomics, it is doubtless less for purposes of collaboration than to criticize its
~chemata.4~
These are, in fact, relatively rough illustrations which may in particular
cases prove to be false; scientific affinities vary enormously according to coun-
tries, schools and individuals. What stands out in the background is the solid
fact of intellectual traditions, of educational and research structures. In several
countries teaching methods may be too narrowly aimed at monodisciplinary
specialization, and fail to foster a dialogue with those working in other dis-
ciplines or to encourage interest in other intellectual approaches or tools; jurists,
psychologists, economists are trained who are familiar solely with authors in
their own field. ‘Juridism’ is distinguished from ‘psychologism’ and from ‘econo-
mism’. Disciplinary constellations, affinities, bridges and associations vary
from country to country; it is one of the merits of Jean Viet’s all-round approach
in his report on the sciences of man in France that it represents an attempt to
review the various interdisciplinary relations obtaining within a single country.47
The multidisciplinary dimension of problem-focused research has been
treated as self-evident. Problem-focused research can, however, be monodisci-
plinary; in the sciences of man there is probably not a single discipline that has
-