Sociology and the environment: An analysis of journal coverage

Many sociologists have suggested that the dominant paradigm in sociology ignores the environment, which accounts for the fact that environmental sociology is poorly represented in sociology’s mainstream journals. The purpose of this article is to test this assumption empirically by examining the coverage of environmental sociology in nine mainstream sociology journals from 1969 through 1994. The nine journals are separated into two tiers, representing higher and lower prestige journals. Each environmental article is categorized by its area (attitudes and behaviors, environmental movement, political economy, risk, and “new human ecology”) and whether it involves “sociology of the environmental issues” (the application of standard sociological perspectives to environmental issues) or “core environmental sociology” (the examination of societal-environmental relationships). We find that less than two percent of all articles published in the sampled journals in the twenty-five-year period of study were environmental, and that the higher tier journals were less likely to publish environmental articles than were the lower tier journals. Environmental articles were more likely to be part of “core environmental sociology” after 1981 than they were “sociology of the environmental issues,” which suggests a greater recognition among both environmental sociologists and journal reviewers that human societies are ecosystem-dependent. The number of environmental articles increased in the 1990s, portending a fruitful period for sociologists specializing on the environment. We argue that the broader field of sociology can benefit by recognizing the linkages environmental sociology has to other sociological specializations and that, ultimately, sociology needs to be able to address environmental variables in order to understand society. Naomi T. Krogman’s primary interest is in stakeholder framing of environmental disputes and natural resource policy change. She is currently a research sociologist at the Center for Socioeconomic Research at the University of Southwestern Louisiana and adjunct faculty in the Department of Sociology, University of Southwestern Louisiana, Lafayette, LA 70504-0198. JoAnne DeRouen Darlington is a research sociologist focusing on social change and community sustainability emerging from the disastrous interactions between society and the environment. She is currently employed with the Natural Hazards Research Center, Campus Box 482, Boulder, CO 80309.     

Teaching the history of women in sociology: Or Dorothy Swaine Thomas,wasn’t she the woman married to William I.?

One characteristic of feminist scholarship is the attention paid to the lost history of women in a wide variety of arenas. This interest stems from the insight that history is a social construction. As such, it is likely influenced by sexist assumptions. This train of thought led to the author’s interest in the possibility that sexism had biased both the opportunities for women in the past and the way the history of sociology had been conceived. This article describes an effort to explore these questions in an undergraduate research seminar. The article describes a variety of means the author used to unveil these problems with her students, and to engage them in asking new questions, reading standard sociological materials in critical ways, and working toward the creation of a less biased understanding of the history of sociology. The reactions of the students and professor, and the products of this course are specified. This course is one of many examples of the way feminist questions and perspectives have the potential for transforming sociology. Shulamit Reinharz is an associate professor of society at Brandies University and the author ofOn Becoming a Social Scientist (Transaction 1984). Her recent articles in feminist sociology focus on such areas as the meaning of miscarriage, the integration of gerontological and feminist theory, an analysis of the ideology of socialist Zionist feminist, Manya Wilbushewitz Shohat, and an overview of the work of Mirra Komarovsky.     

Abandoned not: media sociology as a networked transfield

ABSTRACT

The relationship between the disciplines of communication and sociology has been primarily described as being abandoned by sociologists. This article historicizes the alleged sociological abandonment of communication and media research and centers on media sociology as the key manifestation of an ongoing vibrant relationship between the two disciplines. It has two goals. First, I examine the contours of the abandonment notion since Berelson vs. Schramm, Riesman, and Bauer in Public Opinion Quarterly in 1959. I demonstrate the diversity and the depth of media sociology and argue that an US-centric positivist understanding of media sociology has led to the exaggerated and misleading notion of abandonment, which homogenizes theoretical discourse and discounts scholarly contributions from outside of the US. Personal and collective memories have also documented institutional and organizational growth of media sociology. Second, I propose to conceptualize media sociology as a networked transfield driven by questions transcending disciplinary little boxes. Rather than returning to the Lazarsfeldian media effect paradigm, media sociology as a networked transfield driven by questions will allows scholars take advantage of structural holes for synthesis and innovation.     

The “Adventures” of the Sociology Course in Greek Secondary Education

This article reports the results of a study of the sociology course in Greek secondary education. The aim is to reveal under which circumstances the course has ended up becoming one of the most downgraded courses, and more importantly, how the specific rationale of the course’s structure has resulted in the (re)production of a distorted image of the science of sociology. For that purpose, the 25-year history of the course has been analyzed from the view of: (1) the sociology curriculum’s variations over the years, (2) the underlying rationale of the official documents and the sociology textbooks, and (3) the sociology teachers’ perceptions on the course of sociology. The findings have indicated that the downgrading of the course has resulted in the devaluation of the science of sociology inside the educational community, and that through the school’s rationale (curriculum and teacher’s) a specific interpretation of sociology is being reproduced, which presents it as an everyday and simple science that deals mostly with social problems and their solutions. The ultimate result is that the sociological imagination will possibly never become part of students’ views on life.     

Environmental Harm and “the Good Farmer”: Conceptualizing Discourses of Environmental Sustainability in the Beef Industry

Maintaining sustainability discourses in the face of evidence to the contrary is a topic of considerable interest in sociology. We approach this topic with a focus on the beef industry in Alberta, Canada. By studying the discourses of cow and calf producers this article addresses the following questions: (1) What are the discourses that producers draw on to support their self‐perceptions as stewards of the land, (2) how are these discourses used by producers to negotiate and reconcile their involvement in a system that contributes to environmental degradation, and (3) what are key elements to interpreting these discourses of sustainability? Methods include semistructured interviews with attention to the potential of genomics for enhanced cattle breeding to ameliorate harmful methane emissions. Our findings indicate that producers draw on narratives of balance between economic and environmental concerns, focus on epistemic nearness, and fragment their understanding of the beef industry to maintain discourses of sustainability. These findings offer insights into the impacts that embodied, material forms of knowledge have on farmers’ perceptions of the land, and demonstrate that these narratives and ways of knowing predicate farmers’ understandings of sustainable development.     

Caroline Bartlett Crane and the history of sociology: Salvation, sanitation, and the social gospel

This article investigates the relationship between Progressive era (1890–1920) social reform and the origins of American sociology with a view of the vital contributions of women in these endeavors. I observe the efforts of the first generation of sociologists to legitimate and delineate the field in the “social construction” of the discipline of sociology, as they attempted to combine Christianity, the social gospel, and socialism into a new and unique ideology. In this article I examine the archival material of Progressive era reformer, Caroline Bartlett Crane (1858–1935), a Unitarian minister and student in the sociology department of the University of Chicago in 1896, to address the relationship between theology, sociology, and social reform from a woman’s perspective.     

Die Arbeitsgruppe Professionssoziologie und die Randständigkeit der Professionssoziologie im deutschsprachigen Raum

The article analyzes the consequences of the marginal status of the Sociology of Professions in Germany during the last decades on the efforts of the new working group “Sociology of Professions.” This new working group has been established in order to make professions an attractive research topic. First it will be demonstrated that a lack of a solid grounding in the international literature influences the new efforts to publish textbooks. Second it will be shown that there is a missing historical perspective in the old and new sociology of professions in Germany. Finally everything seems to indicate that the new working group is more interested in questions of general sociology and occupational sociology than in questions of a sociology of professions.     

Sociology as a discipline: Quasi-science and quasi-humanities

Sociologists, like other professionals and academic practitioners, have engaged in a collective project—“becoming a science.” This article traces the occupational and intellectual components of that project, focusing especially on the model of science employed, the limits of that model, and the limits of the science model in general. It is argued that sociology is a quasi-science and a quasi-humanities. Unfortunately, sociology has not systematically pursued its links to the humanities. The article argues for maintaining the empirical and explanatory thrust of the science model, while recognizing the extent to which concepts and theories are civilizationally embedded. The article ends with suggestions for systematically enriching sociology by closer links to the humanities. This article is a revision of a paper presented at the Plenary Session, The Future of Sociology, Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association, August 24, 1988, Atlanta, Georgia. I have discussed the issues raised in this paper with, and received comments on previous drafts from, many colleagues: Andrew Abbott, Renee Anspach, Joseph Berger, Philip Converse, Claude Fischer, Herbert Gans, Michael Kennedy, Albert J. Rothenberg, AndrewScott, Anne Scott, Robert Scott, William Sewell, Jr., Margaret Somers, Sheldon Stryker, and Charles Tilly. They are not responsible for its sins.     

The cultural and social incorporation of sociological knowledge

Any evaluation of sociology as a discipline ought to focus not only on the way sociology is produced, but also on how it is consumed. In this article, we examine the degree to which sociological concepts have been incorporated into the vernacular of American society, the impact of sociological techniques and methods on politics and society, and the relationship between sociology and public policy. While sociologists often point to the problems caused by a certain alienation from the general culture—for example the notion that sociology is written in an obtuse language that the public cannot comprehend—we point to the problems that develop when sociology is too readily incorporated into American culture and society. The danger is that the more popular sociology is, the less likely it will be to maintain the sharp intellectual edge that made its incorporation possible in the first place.     

Classical theory,postmodernism, and the sociology liberal arts curriculum

This article presents classical theory as a modernist endeavor to apprehend the phenomenon of “unity of disunity.” It presents the three ways that classical theory comes to grips with the problem of wholes and parts: the holism of Durkheim, the dialectical materialism of Marx, and the pluralism of Weber. It argues that postmodernism liquidates, rather than solves, the unity of disunity problem by treating “wholes” as mere appearances. The article contends that postmodernism needs to be taken more seriously than it has been by sociologists but that, ultimately, the challenge presented by postmodernism validates the relevancy of classical theory. The article concludes that the postmodernist influence has diminished sociology’s relevance to real-world problems and, as a result, made the discipline less relevant for undergraduates. It calls for a revitalized sociology of sociology with the capacity to think through the trap formed by neoconservatism on the one side and the micro politics of postmodernism on the other.     

Robert E. Park reconsidered: The early writings

Despite Robert E. Park’s prominence in American sociology, his early writings (before 1913) have been neglected. This article argues that Park’s early writings illustrate an important transitional phase in twentieth-century sociological thought. As sociology moved out of German romantic philosophy and toward rationalism and positivism, it had to come to terms with the existence of evil in the world. Park’s essays on the Congo formulated a more complex perspective on modernity’s modes of evil. Along with the Congo essays, Park’s Black Belt studies form a comprehensive portrait of the double-sided moral character and socioeconomic effects of the Reformation. Park’s early writings adumbrate a Gothic sociology of horror, in which the civilizational process erodes the many folk cultures that it draws into its basic forms—civil society and urban life. This article is a revised version of a paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Sociological Association, August 1990. Adapted from Stanford M. Lyman,Militarism, Imperialism, and Racial Accommodation: An Analysis and Interpretation of the Early Writings of Robert E. Park (Fayetteville: The University of Arkansas Press, 1991).     

Quebec Sociology: A Discipline and its Object

Quebec sociology and Quebec society are categorically distinct from other sociologies and countries. Both are “communities,” both have French-speaking majorities, and both exist in Anglo-Saxon environments. As well, Quebec sociology has always been and continues to be obsessed by the national question. Interpretations proposed by sociologists—predominantly French-speaking—of and about the Quebec Question have never been independent of the struggles in which they have taken place. In fact, sociological readings of nationalism in Quebec appear to be a direct consequence of their social position and relationship with political power. Through the prism of sociology, the French-speaking collectivity in Canada has been, successively and simultaneously, characterized through categories of race, ethnic group, society, and nation. 2 This article presents five ways in which sociologists have represented Quebec society. First, the Pioneers: Léon Gérin and Marius Barbeau, or the Quebec “Difference” as a handicap. Second, the characterization of Quebec through race, territory, and soul. Third provides the external perspectives of Miner and Hughes. Fourth will examine the Laval (Quebec) School. Finally, this article will examine Quebec Society as either an ethnic or civic nation. Each theme has been set chronologically in specific periods of Quebec sociology: the Pioneers (Part 1 and 2, before 1940); the institutionalization of academic sociology (Part 3 and 4, 1940-1969); and the “nationalization” and professionalization of sociology (Part 5, 1970 to the present).     

Michel Maffesoli's sociology of modernity and postmodernity: an introduction and critical assessment

This article introduces and criticises Michel Maffesoli's attempt to formulate a post-modern sociology for post-modern times. While arguing that Maffesoli's sociology is suggestive and insightful about many aspects and features of late-modern life this article, nonetheless, questions whether Maffesoli's approach should be accepted as a fruitful sociological paradigm which others should take up uncritically. Moreover, it will be argued that Maffesoli's approach is an ultimately incoherent and one-sided approach to studying the ‘postmodern condition’ in that it does not escape the problem of ‘performative contradiction’ identified by the likes of Habermas, Giddens and Touraine. That is to say, Maffesoli has produced a one-sided and flattened out image of modernity that cannot account for the possibility of social and political critique.     

Rational choice and the sociology of age: Heuristic models

Rational choice is contrasted with the sociology of age as two broad frameworks to aid the search for conceptual models to integrate our fragmented discipline. Some suggestive differences and convergences between them point to the desirability of a more dynamic emphasis in rational choice theory, and to consideration of the philosophical and moral assumptions underlying the “purpose” of action in the sociology of age. Senior Social Scientist at the National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health. This article is adapted from the panel discussion, “The Place of Rational Choice in Sociology,” organized by Guillermina Jasso for the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association in Los Angeles, August 6, 1994.     

Public Sociology or Partisan Sociology? The Curious Case of Whiteness Studies

This paper identifies the common themes in 245-plus refereed articles on whiteness studies that were published in academic journals after 1992 in an attempt to assess the implications of whiteness studies for the discipline of sociology. Of special interest is the relationship between whiteness studies and Michael Burawoy’s call for public sociology. I argue that the emerging field of whiteness studies identifies itself as a public sociology that is infused by the moral vision of critical sociology. Nevertheless, the field does not accept professional sociology as Burawoy defined it. The ontological, epistemological, and soteriological foundations of whiteness studies encourage the field to pander to one segment of the public—the marginalized—and condemn another segment of the public—“privileged whites,” thus rendering impossible a democratic dialogue on one of the most basic social issues of our time. Conflating Western epistemology with whiteness encourages a misreading of American social scientific work on race relations, thus opening the door to a so-called hermeneutics of suspicion. The result is not an innocuous “pop” sociology, but a partisan sociology, whose implications should caution sociologists against an uncritical embracing of public sociology.     

The idea of philosophical sociology

This article introduces the idea of philosophical sociology as an enquiry into the relationships between implicit notions of human nature and explicit conceptualizations of social life within sociology. Philosophical sociology is also an invitation to reflect on the role of the normative in social life by looking at it sociologically and philosophically at the same: normative self‐reflection is a fundamental aspect of sociology's scientific tasks because key sociological questions are, in the last instance, also philosophical ones. For the normative to emerge, we need to move away from the reductionism of hedonistic, essentialist or cynical conceptions of human nature and be able to grasp the conceptions of the good life, justice, democracy or freedom whose normative contents depend on more or less articulated conceptions of our shared humanity. The idea of philosophical sociology is then sustained on three main pillars and I use them to structure this article: (1) a revalorization of the relationships between sociology and philosophy; (2) a universalistic principle of humanity that works as a major regulative idea of sociological research, and; (3) an argument on the social (immanent) and pre‐social (transcendental) sources of the normative in social life. As invitations to embrace posthuman cyborgs, non‐human actants and material cultures proliferate, philosophical sociology offers the reminder that we still have to understand more fully who are the human beings that populate the social world.     

Isomorphism,Institutional Parochialism,and the Sociology of Religion

This article investigates whether the field of sociology of religion is occupied by parochial concerns. We characterize institutional parochialism as the degree to which people in an academic field tend to study their own societies. This study employs a content analysis of articles published in The Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion and Sociology of Religion from 2001 to 2008, with particular attention paid to the incidences in which Muslim and non-Western groups were studied before and after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. There was no change in the rate that “Muslim” communities were studied following the 9/11 attacks, but it appears journal content did change to reflect ongoing debates in the West and in response to mimetic pressures being placed on the field. Overall, if the sociology of religion can be characterized as parochial, we contend that the broader field of American sociology is likely far more so.     

A social world of sociology in Japan

This article discusses the characteristics, problems, and future direction of sociology in Japan. The core problem of the discipline is the disparity between theories and empirical studies. That is, sociologists in Japan are not yet accustomed to the practice of integrating both conceptual inquiry and empirical methods—which has resulted in futile research that is unable to influence social policies. This article explores this problem by surveying historical and institutional circumstances that have surrounded sociologists since the founding of the discipline. The issues discussed include: the birth of the discipline, the rule of the academy by prominent universities, the system of funding, and the practice of recruitment. By suggesting problems that should be dealt with by today’s sociologists, the article indicates the road that sociologists must follow to rise above their “TV commentator” image and take on more influential social roles as professional experts.     

PUBLIC RESPONSES TO TECHNOLOGICAL RISKS:

One of the most serious challenges facing "advanced" industrial societies is the management of technological risks. Recently, a number of sociologists have called attention to the topic, noting the significant contributions sociologists can offer to the ongoing risk debate. This article takes a complementary approach, suggesting that it is important to ask not just what sociology can do for the study of risk, but what the study of risk can do for sociology. Particular promise is evident in studies that go beyond a focus on individuals' risk perceptions, dealing with the behaviors and interests of societal institutions entrusted with the management of risks. Still lacking, however, is a more explicit and coherent conceptual framework, one that can help guide future research toward the testing of sociologically important questions, not just the questions and issues that technologists and policymakers define as important. Working from an explicitly sociological orientation, this article outlines a conceptual perspective that focuses on the "framing" of risk debates by institutional actors. This approach suggests that, given the profound growth of technological efficacy, in the face of modest, it any growth in the efficacy of social control mechanisms, the management of technological risk is likely to become increasingly problematic for sociology as well as for society.     

Pitirim A. Sorokin’s integralism and public sociology

Major features of the thought of Pitirim A. Sorokin are related to Michael Burawoy’s four forms of sociology. The article develops the theme that Sorokin’s system of sociology makes major contributions to identifying standards of excellence for professional, critical, policy, and public sociology and for their interrelationships. Sorokin’s integral ontology and epistemology are described and identified as sources of the distinctive characteristics of his system of thought.