When The Twain Shall Meet: Middle East Area Studies And The Discipline of Economics
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
When the Twain Shall Meet: Middle East Area Studies and the Discipline of EconomicsAn examination of the membership rolls and annual conference programs of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA), and of the membership and course offerings of Middle East Studies programs around the United States, yields the impression that economics is not of central importance to the study of this region of the world.By the same token, area studies tend to be undervalued and underrepresented in the typical department of economics.Within academia in the United States, then, the potential for a healthy interaction between these two realms has been limited.Social science disciplines in the United States, economics in particular, have shrunk from contact with area studies, in part because the incentive system for recognition and promotion in US academia has come to be defined increasingly by mathematical modeling and specialized technical proficiency.More profoundly, economists across the methodological spectrum hold a positivistic attitude toward their subject matter.They reject the relativism and policy impotence that derives from the fullest blown forms of cultural studies, preferring a pro-active "scientific" orientation toward issues such as economic growth.Proponents of cultural studies, from their side, tend to follow the lead of Edward Said's landmark critique of orientalism.They find economics, from neoclassical to Marxian, overly focused on data, statistical correlations and abstract models that are naïvely culture-blind in their application to regions like the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). 1 Outside the United States, there is a vibrant and growing body of work by an expanding pool of MENA economists, most of them from and/or in the region, directed toward real-world issues of political economy.Since 1990, these economic researchers have become increasingly linked to each other in overlapping international networks.Many of them claim to be multilineal and interdisciplinary in theoretical approach.However, here, as in the United States, there is a deep tension between the abstract epistemology of the discipline and the functioning of existing economies within their local and historical particularities.Economic theory of the region is burdened with the legacies of unilineal modernization theory, state-directed development trajectories and, more recently, neoliberal "reform" programs.The latter programs have been based on the ahistorical and culture-neutral assumption that the canonized western "free-market" model is the universally correct key to growth and development.This paper examines the nature and direction of the relationship between economics and Middle East studies in the United States and in the region, the means by which research output is disseminated, the methods of shaping its production, and the contested boundaries of both theory and method in defining the growing "body of knowledge" so produced.The essay concludes by considering whether the tension between these competing intellectual traditions might be harnessed creatively to generate a new dialectic for understanding societies in this part of the world.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,013 |
| Communication savante | 0,013 | 0,016 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».