Abstract
This article asks about the current modes of production in human rights research and how they are (or may be) determined by the structures where that knowledge is generated. These questions will be answered by looking at the results of a preliminary study on the reception and subsequent institutionalisation of studies on human rights in stable structures that are dedicated to their research, training and dissemination in Spanish universities. The starting hypothesis is that this institutionalisation causes conceptual, epistemological and methodological biases in the rationales for knowledge construction in the field of human rights that determine and hinder the interdisciplinary approach demanded by its study. Interdisciplinarity has become a dominant aspect of human rights research. The question about how this feature is articulated and who articulates it in the academic institutional framework is pertinent in a field of knowledge that cannot avoid asymmetries in the production and circulation of knowledge. The results show that human rights research has been mainly institutionalised in stable university structures in Spain within the field of legal sciences, with a clear predominance of the area of the Philosophy of Law. It can be concluded that this has been conditioned by the reception and subsequent development of the study of human rights in Spain. While it has been found that the line developed by these centres and research groups has been consolidated and recognised, it can also be confirmed that their modes of knowledge production do not match the rationale of interdisciplinary research. These limitations are not just endogenous. There are some features of Spanish institutional R&D&i culture that make interdisciplinary research on human rights difficult.
Highlights
This article asks about the current modes of production in human rights research and how they are determined by the structures where that knowledge is generated
The starting hypothesis is that this institutionalisation causes conceptual, epistemological and methodological biases in the rationales for knowledge construction in the field of human rights that determine and hinder the interdisciplinary approach demanded by its study
7 If we look at the statements made by the main associations of these disciplines about what they understand by the term ‘human rights’, the differences between them are remarkable
Summary
This question hides an aspiration that cannot really be satisfied due to the wide range of disciplines and specialisms that currently contribute to the study and implementation of human rights. The formal organisational structures within which to carry out interdisciplinary research are understood as social constructions and spaces of opportunity for new modes of knowledge that highlight its dynamic nature and enable its development (Weingart and Padberg, 2014) This is a necessary basis for interdisciplinarity to take place. Based on the results in the Spanish context, this study aims to provide an axis for the analysis of how the nature and identity of the institutional structures linked to human rights research in the university are determine the potential interaction between disciplines and, the possibility that the knowledge they generate may be really interdisciplinary
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
