Abstract
This chapter reviews the characteristics of knowledge and its institutions discussed at the symposium described in the chapter. It is easy to move from categorization of knowledge that is needed—and these categories must themselves overlap with each other—into the different institutional and other contexts that different kinds of knowledge imply. Thus, it would be possible to take the kind of knowledge needed and then recategorize it into the following types: (1) classical science, (2) applied science and development, (3) nonscientific knowledge and learning, and (4) policy analysis and critique. Each of these strands can be found throughout the cases that were considered. The case of higher education in Sweden shows how a succession of issues called upon different types of knowledge in aid of policy and practice. Researchers in formulating their areas of study and in formulating their results need to be realistic about what could be usable to politicians, administrators, and practitioners.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 call
