This article attempts to provide a proper basis for a general utilization theory. Despite a bulk
of research in the field, the state of the art in utilization theory is poorly developed, being
dominated by the two-communities approach. This approach, however, is more a metaphor than
a true theory and hence, the article argues, all attempts to theorize in the two-communities
perspective are bound to fail because of its basically culturalistic conception. The thesis
proposed is that this culturalistic conception must be replaced by a system theory approach. The
theoretical outline of this systems theory conception may well shed new light on several
continuing problems in the field of utilization research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bell, D. (1973). The coming of post-industrial society. New York: Basic Books.
2.
Brzezinski, Z. (1970). Between two ages. New York: Viking.
3.
Bulmer, M. (1982). The uses of social research: Social investigation in public policy-making. London: Allen & Unwin.
4.
Caplan, N. (1979). The two-communities theory and knowledge utilization. American Behavioral Scientist , 22, 459-470.
5.
Caplan, N. (1980). The use of social science knowledge in policy decisions at the national level. In Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (Ed.), The utilization of the social sciences in policy making in the United States . Paris: Author.
6.
Caplan, N. (1983). Knowledge conversion and utilization. In B. Holzner, K. Knorr, & H. Strasser (Eds.), Realizing social science knowledge. Wien : Physika-Verlag.
7.
Caplan, N., Morrison, A. , & Stambaugh, R. ( 1975). The use of social science knowledge in policy decisions at the national level. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
8.
Cherns, A. (1979). Using the social sciences. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
9.
Dunn, W. (1980). The two-communities metaphor and models of knowledge use. Knowledge, 1, 515-536.
10.
Dunn, W., & Holzner, B. (1988). Knowledge in society: Anatomy of an emerging field. Knowledge in Society, 1.
11.
Ellul, J. (1964). The technological society. New York: Random House .
12.
Heller, F. (Ed.). (1986). The use and abuse of social science. London: Sage.
13.
Holzner, B., & Fisher, E. (1979). Knowledge in use: Considerations in the sociology of knowledge application. Knowledge, 1, 219-244.
14.
Holzner, B., Knorr, K. & Strasser, H. (Eds.). (1983 ). Realizing social science knowledge. Wien : Physika-Verlag.
15.
Holzner, B., & Marx, J. (1979). Knowledge application: The knowledge system in society. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
16.
Kallen, D., et al. (Eds.). (1982). Social science research and public policy making. Windsor : NFER-Nelson.
17.
Karapin, R. (1986). What's the use of social science? In F. Heller (Ed.), The use and abuse of social science (pp. 236-265). London: Sage.
18.
Larsen, J., & Agarwala- Rogers, R. (1977). Re-invention of innovative ideas.Modified? Adopted? None of the above?Evaluation, 4, 136-140.
19.
Lazarsfeld, P., & Reitz, J. (1975). An introduction to applied sociology . New York: Elsevier.
20.
Lindblom, C., & Cohen, D. (1979). Usable knowledge: Social science and social problem solving. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
21.
Luhmann, N. (1977). Theoretische und praktische Probleme der anwendungsbezogenen Sozialwissenschaften [Theoretical and practical problems in applying social sciences]. In Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (Ed.), Interaktion von Wissenschaft und Politik [Interaction between science and policy]. Frankfurt: Campus.
22.
Luhmann, N. (1981). Theoretische Orientierungen der Politik [Theoretical orientations of policy]. In N. Luhmann (Ed.), Soziologische Aufklärung, Bd. 3 [Sociological enlightenment, Vol. 3] Opladen : Westdeutscher-Verlag.
23.
Luhmann, N. (1982). The differentiation of society. New York: Columbia University Press.
24.
Luhmann, N. (1984a). Ecological communicationChicago: University of Chicago Press.
25.
Luhmann, N. (1984b). Religious dogmatics & the evolution of society. Lewiston, NY : Mellen.
26.
Luhmann, N. (1985). A sociological theory of law. New York: Routledge, Chapman & Hall.
27.
Luhmann, N. (1987). Love as passion: The codification of intimacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28.
Lynn, R. (Ed.). (1978). Knowledge and policy: The uncertain connection. Washington. DC: National Academy of Sciences.
29.
Meynaud, J. (1968). Technocracy . London: Methuen.
30.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (Ed.). ( 1971). Science, growth, and society. Paris : Author.
31.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (Ed.). ( 1979). Social sciences in policy making. Paris: Author.
32.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (Ed.). ( 1980). The utilization of the social sciences in policy making in the United States. Paris: Author .
33.
Rich, R. (Ed.). (1981). The knowledge cycle. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
34.
Scott, R. & Shore, A. (1979). Why sociology does not apply. New York: Elsevier.
35.
Shostak, A. (Ed.). (1974). Putting sociology to work. New York: McKay .
36.
Snow, C. (1965). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37.
Stehr, N., & Baldamus, W. (1983). Accounts and action: The logic(s) of social science and pragmatic knowledge. In B. Holzner, K. Knorr, & H. Strasser (Eds.), Realizing social science knowledge (pp. 73-78). Wien : Physika-Verlag.
38.
Weiss, C. (Ed.). (1977). Using soccal research in public policy making. Lexington, MA : D. C. Heath.
39.
Weiss, C. (1979). The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 39, 426-431.
40.
Weiss, C., & Bucuvalas, M. (1980). Social science research and decision-making . New York: Columbia University Press.
