Maria Luísa Quaresma, Cristóbal Villalobos, MarioFergnani & Bárbara Diaz (2024)

International Journal of Sociology of Education, 13(1). Open access

Abstract. Few studies focus on understanding the role of universities in the elites’ legitimation processes. This article examines how elite universities – in the context of Chilean tertiary education massification – actively create privileged statuses. Focusing on eight case studies, we examine how these universities justify their roles and existence, generating distinctions that promote highly exclusive spaces, replicating elite privilege. Through 48 semi-structured interviews, this article focuses on understanding the justification arguments employed by faculty and deans from these elite institutions. Following Boltanski’s and Thévenot’s theoretical model, the results illustrate three different justification regimes: i) arguing for their elite status within the university system; ii) justifying the role they fulfil within Chilean society; and iii) defending their existence in the social structure. These regimes combine arguments relating to social justice, efficiency and market system performance in an eclectic and pragmatic way.

Lien / Link

Mikaela Vasstrøm & Hans Kjetil Lysgård (2024)

Energy Research & Social Science, 110

Abstract. Global climate and energy security concerns are fuelling energy transition policies at all levels globally. However, the deployment of energy transitions spurs contestations among diverse and competing economic, sociocultural and environmental interests and values. Insufficient attention has been given to understanding the value judgements and moral basis underlying claims of justice in energy development. This paper applies the theory on justification developed by Boltanski and Thévenot to analyse Norwegian policy trajectories and emerging critical moments of contestation related to wind power development over the past 35 years. Energy conflicts generate controversies of justifications between different understandings of “the common good” and “just” transitions. The analysis depicts how national and local actors draw on different orders of worth to justify, critique and legitimize certain energy policy trajectories. Increasing public controversies create moments of critique that destabilize policies and further new alignments of justifications to legitimize wind power development. Thus, energy policy justifications are stabilized and destabilized by a range of actors, discourses and contextual conditions influenced by understandings of energy history, current needs and future aspirations. This analytical approach contributes to understanding normative controversies of energy justifications and delegitimizations of energy policy changes over time at different scales.

Lien / Link