Historical and quantitative examination of one scientific field—geology—provides the basis for exploring how Western science became institutionalized worldwide during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Prior research emphasizes the importance of industrialization, Protestantism, and the legacy of colonial rule. An alternative perspective is offered here—one rooted in sociological neoinstitutionalism. Mechanisms are examined that linked non-Western colonies and nations to “world society,” serving as conduits for the diffusion of Western science. The relevant mechanisms have changed over time as world society has become more organized and structured. Direct ties among nations were important early on, but links to international organizations became important in the postwar era. Historical examples and a quantitative analysis of the spread of professional geological associations from 1800 to 1990 provide evidence in support of several theories. Results suggest that the institutionalization of geology was very much an international process. Societies strongly linked to world society institutionalized geological science rapidly, supporting neoinstitutional predictions. Finally, Protestantism had a positive effect on the institutionalization of geological science, while the effects of colonization and industrialism were mixed and fluctuated over time.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbrahamGary A. [1983] 1990. “Misunderstanding the Merton Thesis: A Boundary Dispute Between History and Sociology.” Chap. 14 in Puritanism and the Rise of Modern Science: The Merton Thesis, edited by CohenLB. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
2.
AlterPeter. 1987. The Reluctant Patron: Science and the State in Britain, 1850–1920.New York: St. Martin's.
3.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).1985. Directory of Scientific and Engineering Societies in Sub-Saharan Africa (AAAS Publication No. 85–21). Washington, DC: AAAS.
4.
BarrettDavid B., ed. 1982. World Christian Encyclopedia.Nairobi, Kenya: Oxford University Press.
5.
BasallaGeorge. 1967“The Spread of Western Science.”Science156 (May):611–22.
6.
BeckerGeorge. 1984. “Pietism and Science: A Critique of Robert K. Merton's Hypothesis.”American Journal of Sociology89:1065–90.
7.
BehrmanJack N.1980. Industry Ties with Science and Technology in Developing Countries.Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn and Hain.
8.
Ben-DavidJoseph. 1971. The Scientist's Role in Society.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
9.
Ben-DavidJoseph. 1990. Scientific Growth: Essays on the Social Organization and Ethos of Science.Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
10.
Ben-DavidJoseph. 1991. Scientific Growth: Essays on the Social Organization and Ethos of Science.Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
11.
BernalJ.D.1939. The Social Function of Science.New York: MacMillan.
12.
BlackCyril E.1966. The Dynamics of Modernization: A Study in Comparative History.New York: Harper and Row.
13.
BoliJohn. 1976. “The Expansion of Nation-States, 1870–1970.” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, Stanford University, Stanford CA.
14.
BoliJohn. 1980. “Global Integration and the Universal Increase in State Dominance, 1910–1970.” Chap. 5 in Studies of the Modern World-System, edited by BergesenA. J.. New York: Academic.
15.
BoliJohn and ThomasGeorge M.. 2000. Constructing World Culture: International Non-Governmental Organizations since 1875.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
16.
Box-SteffensmeierJanet and ZornChristopher. 2002. “Duration Models for Repeated Events.”Journal of Politics64:1069–94.
17.
BravoMichael and SorlinSverker, eds. 2002. Narrating the Arctic: A Cultural History of Nordic Scientific Practice.New York: Science History Publications.
18.
CarneiroAna, DiogaMaria Paula, and SimoesAna. 2000. “Enlightenment Science in Portugal: The Estrangeirados and Their Communication Networks.”Social Studies of Science30:591–619.
19.
ChambersDavid Wade. 1981. “Period and Process in Colonial and National Science.” Pp. 297–321 in Scientific Colonialism: A Cross-Cultural Comparison, edited by ReingoldN. and RothenbergM.. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.
20.
CohenI. Bernard, ed. 1990. Puritanism and the Rise of Modern Science: The Merton Thesis.New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
21.
ColeStephen and PhelanThomas J.. 1999. “The Scientific Productivity of Nations.”Minerva37:1–23.
22.
CrawfordElisabeth, ShinnTerry, and SorlinSverker. 1993. Denationalizing Science: The Contexts of International Scientific Practice.Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.
23.
DearPeter. 2001. Revolutionizing the Sciences: European Knowledge and Its Ambitions, 1500–1700.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
24.
Soysade, IndraJohn R. Oneal, and ParkYong-Hee. 1997. “Testing Power-Transition Theory Using Alternative Measures of National Capabilities.”The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41:509–28.
25.
DiMaggioPaul J. and PowellWalter W.. 1983. “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.”American Sociological Review48:147–60.
26.
DroriGili. 1997. “The National Science Agenda as a Ritual of Modern Nation-Statehood: The Consequences of National ‘Science for Development’ Projects.” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
27.
DroriGili. 1998. “A Critical Appraisal of Science Education for Economic Development.” Pp. 49–74 in Socio-Cultural Perspectives on Science Education: An International Dialogue, edited by CobernW. W.. Kluwer Academic.
28.
DroriGili. 2000. “Science Education and Economic Development: Trends, Relationships, and Research Agenda.”Studies in Science Education35(2):27–58.
29.
DroriGili, MeyerJohn W., RamirezFrancisco O., and SchoferEvan. 2003. Science in the Modern World Polity: Institutionalization and Globalization.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
30.
EakinMarshall C.1999. “The Origins of Modern Science in Costa Rica: The Instituto Fisico-Geografico Nacional, 1887–1904.”Latin American Research Review34:123–50.
31.
EllulJacques. 1964. The Technological Society.New York: Knopf.
32.
EzrahiYaron. 1990. The Descent of Icarus: Science and the Transformation of Contemporary Democracy.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33.
FerreiraEduardo de Sousa. 1974. Portugese Colonialism in Africa: The End of an Era.Paris. France: UNESCO.
34.
FieldhouseDavid K.1966. The Colonial Empires: A Comparative Survey from the Eighteenth Century.New York: Delacorte.
35.
FieldhouseDavid K.1981. Colonialism, 1870–1945: An Introduction.London, England: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
36.
FinnemoreMartha. 1996. “Norms and State Structures: UNESCO and the Creation of State Science Bureaucracies.” Pp. 34–68 in National Interests in International Society.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
37.
ForjeJohn W.1989. Science and Technology in Africa.Essex, England: Longman.
38.
FoucaultMichel. 1991. “Governmentality.” Pp. 87–104 in The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, edited by BurchellG., GordonC., and MillerP.. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
39.
FrameJ. Davidson, NarinFrancis, and CarpenterJohn P.. 1977. “The Distribution of World Science.”Social Studies of Science7: 501–16.
40.
FrankDavid J., HironakaAnn, and SchoferEvan. 2000. “The Nation-State and the Environment over the Twentieth Century.”American Sociological Review65: 96–116.
41.
GeschwindCarl-Henry. 1998. “Embracing Science and Research: Early Twentieth-Century Jesuits and Seismology in the United States.”Isis89:27–49.
42.
GierynThomas. 1983. “Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists.”American Sociological Review48:781–95.
43.
GreenawayFrank. 1996. Science International: A History of the International Council of Scientific Unions.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
44.
GuptaS. P.1979. Modern India and Progress in Science and Technology.New Dehli, India: Vikas Publishing House.
45.
HaasPeter M.1992. “Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination.”International Organization46:1–35.
46.
HallA. Rupert. 1983. The Revolution in Science, 1500–1700.London, England: Longman.
47.
HallA. Rupert. 1994. “Science, Technology, and Warfare.” Chap. 9 in Science and Society: Historical Essays on the Relations of Science, Technology, and Medicine, edited by HallA. R.. Aldershot, England: Variorum.
48.
HenigeDavid P.1970. Colonial Governors from the Fifteenth Century to the Present.Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
49.
HiltonRonald. 1970. The Scientific Institutions of Latin America.Stanford, CA: California Institute of International Studies.
50.
HironakaAnn. 2002. “Changing Meanings, Changing Institutions: An Institutional Analysis of Patent Legislation. Sociological Inquiry72:108–30.
51.
HowseDerek. 1980. Greenwich Time and the Discovery of the Longitude.Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
52.
HuffToby. 1993. The Rise of Early Modern Science: Islam, China, and the West.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
53.
Institut International de la Paix.1911. Annuaire de la vie Internationale (International Life Yearbook). Paris, France: Institut International de la Paix.
54.
JacobMargaret C.1997. Scientific Culture and the Making of the Industrial West.New York: Oxford University Press.
55.
JangYong Suk. 2000. “The Worldwide Founding of Ministers of Science and Technology, 1950–1990.”Sociological Perspectives43:247–70.
56.
JeppersonRonald L.2002. “The Development and Application of Sociological Neoinstitutionalism.” Pp. 229–66 in New Directions in Contemporary Sociological Theory, edited by BergerJ. and ZelditchM.. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
57.
KeayRonald. 1976. “Scientific Cooperation in Africa.”African Affairs75(298):86–97.
58.
KuhnThomas S.1977. The Essential Tension.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
59.
LaudanRachel. 1976. “Ideas and Organization in British Geology: A Case Study in Institutional History.”Isis68:527–38.
60.
League of Nations. 1929. Handbook of International Organizations.Geneva, Switzerland: League of Nations.
61.
LivingstoneDavid N.1992. The Geographical Tradition: Episodes in the History of a Contested Enterprise.Oxford, England: Blackwell.
62.
McClellanJames E.1985. Science Reorganized: Scientific Societies in the Eighteenth Century.New York: Columbia University Press.
63.
McClellanJames E.1992. Science and Colonialism: Saint Domingue in the Old Regime.Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
64.
MertonRobert K. [1938] 1970. Science, Technology, and Society in Seventeenth Century England.New York: Howard Fertig.
65.
MertonRobert K. [1938] 1990. “Motive Forces of the New Science.” Pp. 112–31 in Puritanism and the Rise of Modern Science: The Merton Thesis, edited by CohenI.B.. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
66.
MertonRobert K.1973. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
67.
MertonRobert K.1984. “The Fallacy of the Latest Word: The Case of ‘Pietism and Science.”’American Journal of Sociology89:1091–1121.
68.
MeyerJohn W.1987. “The World Polity and the Authority of the Nation-State.” Pp. 41–70 in Institutional Structure: Constructing State, Society, and Individual, edited by ThomasG., MeyerJ.W., RamirezF. O., and BoliJ.. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
69.
MeyerJohn W.1988. “Conceptions of Christendom: Notes on the Distinctiveness of the West.” Pp. 395–413 in Cross-National Research in Sociology, edited by KohnM.. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
70.
MeyerJohn W., BoliJohn, ThomasGeorge, and RamirezFrancisco O.. 1997. “World Society and the Nation State.”American Journal of Sociology103:144–81.
71.
MeyerJohn W., FrankDavid, HironakaAnn, SchoferEvan, and TumaNancy B.. 1997. “The Rise of an Environmental Sector in World Society.”International Organization, 51:623–51.
72.
MeyerJohn W., KamensDavid, BenavotAaron, and ChaYoung Kyoung. 1992. School Knowledge for the Masses: World Models and National Primary Curricular Categories in the 20th Century.Washington DC: Falmer.
73.
NagelErnest. 1969. The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation.New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace, and World.
74.
NeedhamJoseph. 1954. Science and Civilization in China.New York: Cambridge University Press.
75.
NeedhamJoseph. 1969. The Grand Titration.London, England: Allen and Undwin.
76.
NoyesHoward B.1984. World Energy.Edenbridge, England: CLS Graphics, Ltd.
77.
O'ConnorJean G. and MeadowsA.J.. 1976. “Specialization and Professionalization in British Geology.”Social Studies of Science6:77–89.
78.
OnealJohn R. and RussettBruce. 1999. “Assessing the Liberal Peace with Alternative Specifications: Trade Still Reduces Conflict.”Journal of Peace Research36:423–42.
79.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 1971. “Science Growth and Society: A New Perspective.”Report of the Secretary General's Ad Hoc Group on New Concepts in Science Policy. Paris, France: OECD.
80.
OsierMargaret J.2000. Rethinking the Scientific Revolution.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
81.
PalladinoPaolo and WorboysMichael. 1993. “Science and Imperialism.”Isis84:91–102.
82.
PorterRoy. 1978. “Gentlemen and Geology: The Emergence of a Scientific Career, 1660–1920.”Historical Journal21:809–36.
83.
PriceDerek J. de Solla. 1986. Little Science, Big Science—and Beyond.New York: Columbia University Press.
84.
PyensonLewis. 1985. Cultural Imperialism and Exact Sciences: German Overseas Expansion, 1900–1930.New York: Peter Lang.
85.
PyensonLewis. 1993. Civilizing Mission: Exact Sciences and French Overseas Expansion, 1830–1940.Baltimore, MD and London, England: Johns Hopkins University Press.
86.
PyensonLewis and Sheets-PyensonSusan. 1999. Servants of Nature: A History of Scientific Institutions, Enterprises, and Sensibilities.New York: W.W. Norton.
87.
RamirezFrancisco O., SoysalYasemin, and ShanahanSuzanne. 1998. “The Changing Logic of Political Citizenship: Cross-National Acquisition of Women's Suffrage.”American Sociological Review62:735–45.
88.
ReingoldNathan and RothenbergMarc. 1987. Scientific Colonialism: A Cross-Cultural Comparison.Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.
89.
RudwickM. J. S.1985. The Great Devonian Controversy: The Shaping of Scientific Knowledge among Gentlemanly Specialists.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
90.
RussellColin A.1983. Science and Social Change in Britain and Europe, 1700–1900.New York: St. Martin's.
91.
SachsMichael, ed. 1990. World Guide to Scientific Associations and Learned Societies, fifth edition.Munchen, Germany: Saur.
92.
SardarZiauddin, ed. 1988. The Revenge of Athena: Science, Exploitation, and the Third World.London, England: Mansell.
93.
SchoferEvan. Forthcoming. “Cross-National Variation in the Expansion of Western Science.”Social Forces..
94.
SchoferEvan. 1999a. “The Rationalization of Science and the Scientization of Society: International Science Organizations, 1870–1995.” Pp. 249–66 in World Polity in Formation: A Century of International Non-Governmental Organization, edited by BoliJ. and ThomasG.. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
95.
SchoferEvan. 1999b. “The Institutionalization of Science as Social Authority and Institutional Structure in the World System 1700–1990.” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology. Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
96.
SchoferEvan, RamirezFranciso O., and MeyerJohn W.. 2000. “The Effects of Science on National Economic Development, 1970 to 1990.”American Sociological Review65:866–87.
97.
SchottThomas. 1993. “World Science: Globalization of Institutions and Participation.”Science, Technology, and Human Values18:196–208.
98.
Schroeder-GudehusBrigitte. 1973. “Challenge to Transnational Loyalties: International Scientific Organizations after the First World War.”Science Studies3:93–118.
99.
SchwartzmanSimon. 1991. A Space for Science: The Development of the Scientific Community in Brazil.University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
100.
ShapinSteven. 1988. “Understanding the Merton Thesis.”Isis79:594–605.
101.
ShapinSteven. 1994. A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seventeenth-Century England.Chicago, IL. University of Chicago Press.
102.
ShenhavYehouda and KamensDavid. 1991. “The ‘Costs’ of Institutional Isomorphism in Non-Western Countries.”Social Studies of Science21:427–545.
103.
WesleyShrum and ShenhavYehouda. 1995. “Science and Technology in Less Developed Countries.” Pp. 627–51 in The Handbook of Science, Technology and Society, edited by JasanoffS., MarkalG., PetersonJ., and PinchT.. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
104.
SingerJ. David and SmallMelvin. 1966. “The Composition and Status Ordering of the International System, 1815–1940.”World Politics18:236–82.
105.
SingerJ. David and SmallMelvin. 1990. National Material Capabilities Data, 1816–1985.Ann Arbor, MI: ICSPR.
106.
SingerJ. David and SmallMelvin. 1991. “Diplomatic Exchange Data, 1815–1970”[MRDF, ICPSR version]. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Mental Health Research Institute, Correlates of War Project [producer]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].
107.
SkolnikoffEugene B.1993. The Elusive Transformation: Science, Technology, and the Evolution of International Politics.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
108.
SpaeyJaques. 1971. Science for Development: An Essay on the Origin and Organization of National Science Policies.Paris, France: UNESCO.
109.
StaffordRobert A.1989. Scientist of Empire: Sir Roderick Murchison, Scientific Exploration, and Victorian Imperialism.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
110.
StaffordRobert A.1990. “Annexing the Landscapes of the Past: British Imperial Geology in the Nineteenth Century.” Pp. 67–89 in Imperialism and the Natural World, edited by MacKenzieJ. M.. Manchester, England and New York: Manchester University Press.
111.
TolbertPamela S. and ZuckerLynne G.. 1983. “Institutional Sources of Change in the Formal Structure of Organizations: The Diffusion of Civil Service Reform, 1880–1935.”Administrative Science Quarterly28:22–39.
TumaNancy B. and HannanMichael T.. 1984. Social Dynamics: Models and Methods.Orlando: Academic.
114.
Union of International Associations (UIA). 1986, 1988, 1995, 2000. The Yearbook of International Association.Munchen, Germany: K.G. Saur.
115.
United Nations Education, Science, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).1979. Science, Technology, and Government Policy: A Ministerial Conference for Europe and North America.Paris, France: UNESCO.
116.
United Nations Education, Science, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).1982, 1995. Statistical Yearbook.Paris, France: UNESCO.
117.
VucinichAlexander. 1963. Science in Russian Culture: A History to 1860.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
118.
VucinichAlexander. 1970. Science in Russian Culture.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
119.
WatanabeMasao. 1997. Science and Cultural Exchange in Modern History: Japan and the West.Tokyo, Japan: Hokusen-Sha.
120.
WaymanFrank W., David SingerJ., and GoertzGary. 1983. “Capabilities, Allocations, and Success in Militarized Disputes and Wars, 1816–1976.”International Studies Quarterly, 27:497–515.
121.
WeinerDenise, ed. 1985. Proceedings: African Regional Seminar on the Role of Scientific and Engineering Societies in Development (AAAS Publication 85–18). Washington, DC: AAAS.
122.
WuthnowRobert. 1979. “The Emergence of Modern Science and World System.”Theory and Society8:215–43.
123.
WuthnowRobert. 1980. “The World-Economy and the Institutionalization of Science in Seventeenth-Century Europe.” Pp. 57–76 in Studies of the Modern World System, edited by BergesenA.. New York: Academic.
