摘要
社会政策比较研究目前存在三个问题:其一,讨论研究方法时总是忽略以类型学为代表的描述性研究;其二,一些关键变量的概念化存在争议或相互矛盾;其三,分析概念化或研究方法时脱离历史背景的分析。为此,笔者在系统阅读并梳理战后比较社会政策文献的基础上,厘清描述性、解释性两类研究以及它们各自关注的概念。有了合适的视野之后,对于方法的讨论依然会区分两支研究传统并线进行。同时,关于研究脉络的叙述方式也会影响学者们对这一领域研究的理解,因而本文的另一大贡献便是将每一个关键的概念化方式与理论嵌入到历史流变中,以社会政策实践的演变解释其研究的变化。
There are three problems in the comparative study of social policy at present. Firstly, descriptive research represented by typology is always neglected in the discussion of research methods. Secondly, there are disputes or contradictions in the conceptualization of some key variables. Thirdly, the analysis of conceptualization or research methods is divorced from the historical background. Therefore, on the basis of systematically reading and sorting out the literature of comparative social policy after WWII, the authors clarify the descriptive and explanatory research and their respective concepts of concern. After having a suitable vision, we will distinguish the two branches of research traditions in the discussion of methods. At the same time, since the narrative way of the research context will also affect scholars’ researches in this field, another contribution of this article is to embed every key conceptualization and method into historical changes and explain the transformation of the research with the evolution of social policy practice.
作者
蒙克
华冉
汪佩洁
Ke Meng;Ran Hua;Peijie Wang
出处
《中国公共政策评论》
2020年第2期1-27,共27页
Chinese Public Policy Review
基金
国家社会科学基金青年项目“养老、就业和家庭政策统筹协调机制的研究”(16CGL045)
清华大学自主科研基金“中国女生劳动参与率和总和生育率关系变动”(2015THZWJC09)
唐仲英基金会“仲英青年学者”计划
关键词
比较社会政策
概念化
方法
描述性研究
解释性研究
Comparative Social Policy
Conceptualization
Methods
Descriptive Research
Explanatory Research
作者简介
蒙克,清华大学公共管理学院副教授;华冉,清华大学公共管理学院博士研究生;汪佩洁,清华大学公共管理学院博士研究生。
