Institutional Innovations in the Social Sphere: Methodological Assumptions for Studies

Occupation: Head of the Center of the Studies in Theory and History of Sociology
Affiliation: Institute of Sociology of FCTAS RAS
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow

Journal name

Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya

Edition

Issue 11

Pages

18-28

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to draw attention to methodological issues of considering the institutionalization of innovations in the social sphere from the point of view of microsociology. As starting assumption for the proposed approach, it takes Habermas’ ideas about the collision of “the system and the life world”. The article appeals to phenomenological studies of the recent institutional innovations that are focussed on the meanings by participants, their practices and interaction. The article proposes to pay attention to the role of grassroots practices of interaction and communication in the formation of institutions and their “endogeneity’. The notions of "conventional" meanings, actions, and fields are proposed. The article argues that the approach has a heuristic potential, gives insights in revealing the risks of possible deviations from the planned models or deformation of the expected social effects.

Keywords

methodology, innovations, institutionalization, typification, system, lifeworld, conventional actions, meanings

Received

05.11.2019

Publication date

02.12.2019

Number of characters

34846

Cite

GOST	Danilova E. Institutional Innovations in the Social Sphere: Methodological Assumptions for Studies // Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya – 2019. – Issue 11 C. 18-28 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://ras.jes.su/socis/s013216250007446-3-1-en (circulation date: 19.04.2025). DOI: 10.31857/S013216250007446-3
MLA	Danilova, Elena N. "Institutional Innovations in the Social Sphere: Methodological Assumptions for Studies." Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya 11 (2019):18-28. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250007446-3
APA	Danilova E. (2019). Institutional Innovations in the Social Sphere: Methodological Assumptions for Studies. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya (11), pp.18-28 DOI: 10.31857/S013216250007446-3

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 1740

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Berger P., Luckmann T. (1995) Social Construction of Reality. Moscow: Academia-Tsentr; Medium. (In Russ.)
2. Boltanski L., Thévenot L. (2006) On Justification Economies of Worth. New Haven: Princeton University Press.
3. Danilova Ye. (2018) Transformations of Welfare Policy and Discourse on Social Justice in Russia. Mir Rossii [Universe of Russia]. Vol. 27. No. 2: 36–61. (In Russ.)
4. Dudchenko O. N., Mytil A. V. (2018) Specificity of the elderly group as an object of social policy. Sotsiologicheskaya nauka i sotsialʹnaya praktika [Sociological science and social practice]. Vol. 6. No. 1: 84–100. (In Russ.)
5. Dudchenko O. N., Mytil A. V. (2017) Formation of the Institute for Independent Quality Assessment: Issues and Development Prospects. Sotsiologicheskaya nauka i sotsialʹnaya praktika [Sociological Science and Social Practice]. Vol. 5. No. 1: 70–88. (In Russ.)
6. Gorshkov M.K., Petukhov V.V., eds. (2107) Russian society and the challenges of time. Book Five. Moscow: Vesʹ Mir. (In Russ.)
7. Habermas J. (1995) The Theory of Communicative Action Vol. 2: Lifeword and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Boston: Beacon Press
8. Klimova S. G. (2017) Meanings and Practices of Denationalization of Social Services. Sociological Studies. No. 2: 48–56. (In Russ.)
9. Mueller K., Pikel A. (2002) The change of paradigms of the post-communist transformation. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 9: 67–82. (In Russ.)
10. Polterovich V.M. (2004) Society and reform. Institutional traps: is there a way out? Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennostʹ [Social sciences and modernity]. № 3: 5–16. (In Russ.)
11. Shkaratan O.I. (2004) Russian order: the vector of change. Moscow: VITA-Press. (In Russ.)
12. Schutz A. (1995) Returning home. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 2: 137–145. (In Russ.)
13. Thévenot L. (2006). Pragmatics of knowledge. Introduction: a study of the relationship between knowledge, collectivity and practice. Transl. from Fr. by A.D. Khlopin; ed. by O.A. Oberemko. Sotsiologicheskiy zhurnal [Sociological Journal]. №1-2: 5–39. (In Russ.)
14. Vasilkova V.V., Minin V.N. (2019). Communicative barriers in the practice of providing public services to citizens. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 1: 75–84. (In Russ.)
15. Weber M. (1996) On some categories of understanding sociology In: Dobrenkov V.I.(Ed.) West-European sociology of the nineteenth - early twentieth centuries. Moscow: MUBiU: 491–507. (In Russ.)
16. Yadov V.A. (2007) Theoretical conceptual explanations of the “post-communist” transformations. In: Gorshkov M.K. (Ed.) Russia reforming. Yearbook Issue 6. Moscow: IS RAN: 12–23. (In Russ.)