Issues of Size and Scale in the Emerging «Intelligent Society and Economy»
Edited By Tavis D. Jules and Patrick Ressler
The volume is concerned with educational developments in small and microstates, a topic that has only relatively recently started to attract the attention it deserves. It is guided by the questions (i) if and how small and microstates deal with policy challenges to their education systems that are particularly important for their future development and (ii) whether there is something like typical «small / microstate behavior.» The volume seeks to contribute to a genuinely comparative approach to education in small and microstates. Moreover, widening conventional definitions of smallness, it aims to advance research in the field not only in a thematic but also in a theoretical perspective. Overall, the volume seeks to expand our understanding of small and microstates – and by implication of big states as well –, especially regarding what is general and what is particular about their behavior.
Geostrategic Projection and Projectability – Suggestions for an Agenda for Future Research in a Promising Field (Tavis D. Jules / Patrick Ressler)
← 268 | 269 →
Tavis D. Jules and Patrick Ressler
Geostrategic Projection and Projectability – Suggestions for an Agenda for Future Research in a Promising Field
Based on the preceding chapters as well as what has been said in the introductory chapter, we argue that it is time to revisit not only the raison d’être of small states research711 but also the ways in which we work with smallness as an analytical category. In order to help agents in national, regional, international, and other spheres to understand the situation of individual small states better, we suggest to step back analytically a bit more. While much of the existing small states literature seems to be concerned primarily with generating ‘ready-to-eat’ policy recommendations on what certain states can or should learn – this is also true for some of the texts in this volume –, we follow Steiner-Khamsi who argues for a shift in perspectives: instead of asking “What can be learned?,” Steiner-Khamsi suggests to ask “What has been learned?”712 While the kind of knowledge such an approach is likely to produce is certainly not the ‘hands-on knowledge’ many practitioners expect in the first place, it is the kind of analytical reflection knowledge that is indispensable for rounded assessments and well-thought-out policies.
Moreover, we also encourage systematic comparisons across the boundaries of formal definitions on the basis of alternative notions of smallness as this is likely to expand significantly our understanding of the considerable diversity of states...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.