French Sociology and State

8/10/2019 French Sociology and State

1/12

http://csi.sagepub.com/ Curre nt Soci ology

http://csi.sagepub.com/content/60/5/719The online version of this article can be foun d at:

DOI: 10.1177/0011392112447128

2012 60: 719 originally published online 14 June 2012Current Sociology Philippe Masson

French sociology and the state

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

International Sociological Association

can be found at:Current Sociology Additional services and information for

http://csi.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://csi.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

What is This?

- Jun 14, 2012OnlineFirst Version of Record

- Aug 21, 2012Version of Record>>

at UNGS on February 13, 2013csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://csi.sagepub.com/http://csi.sagepub.com/http://csi.sagepub.com/content/60/5/719http://csi.sagepub.com/content/60/5/719http://www.sagepublications.com/http://www.isa-sociology.org/http://csi.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://csi.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://csi.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://csi.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://csi.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/06/11/0011392112447128.full.pdfhttp://csi.sagepub.com/content/60/5/719.full.pdfhttp://csi.sagepub.com/http://csi.sagepub.com/http://csi.sagepub.com/http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://csi.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/06/11/0011392112447128.full.pdfhttp://csi.sagepub.com/content/60/5/719.full.pdfhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://csi.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://csi.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://www.isa-sociology.org/http://www.sagepublications.com/http://csi.sagepub.com/content/60/5/719http://csi.sagepub.com/


2/12

Current Sociology60(5) 719 729

The Author(s) 2012Reprints and permission: sagepub.

co.uk/journalsPermissions.navDOI: 10.1177/0011392112447128

csi.sagepub.com

CS

French sociologyand the state

Philippe MassonUFR de sociologie, Universit de Nantes

AbstractThis paper examines the role of the state in the development of French Sociology after1945. This role was important in the institutionalization of the discipline. It favouredthe creation of research teams, resarch centres or laboratories. The State favoured thefunding of french sociology too. This funding, in the form of research contracts withvarious public bodies, has contributed to the emergence of the figure of the expert and,more broadly, to the involvement of sociologists in sectoral policies.

KeywordsFrench sociology, funding, state, institutionalisation

IntroductionIn the USA, private foundations such as the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial Fund,the Carnegie Corporation and the Russell Sage Foundation played a fundamental role inthe development of the American social sciences (Bulmer, 1984; Chapoulie, 2001;

Fisher, 1993). The development of French sociology was based on another model. InFrance, the universities where sociology is taught are public bodies, and their lecturers,assistant professors and professors, or the researchers, are civil servants; the research

published in the learned journals of the discipline is mainly produced by them. For teach-ing and for jobs, as for funding, French sociology is closely tied to the state. The statehas, through its senior civil servants, ministries, and governments, played a decisive rolein the development of sociology since the late 1950s. The relationship between sociolo-gists and the state is, therefore, a central issue in the history of French sociology; thedebate that it raises is a recurrent one, around the classic opposition between autonomyand dependence. But because the terms it starts from are ambiguous (since when is one

Corresponding author:Philippe Masson, UFR de sociologie, Universit de NantesEmail: [email protected]

CSI0010.1177/0011392112447128MassonCurrent Sociology2012

Article

http://csi.sagepub.com/http://csi.sagepub.com/http://csi.sagepub.com/http://csi.sagepub.com/


3/12


4/12

Masson 721

Today, sociology is taught in more and more varied courses, including ones oneducation, information/communication, or medicine, for example; it also figures ininstitutions training midwives and social workers. This expansion of teaching has

brought considerable growth in the numbers of professors from 20 in 1958 to nearly800 at the beginning of the 21st century and to those must be added nearly 300 researchofficers in various public bodies such as CNRS and the Institut National de la Statistiqueet des Etudes Economiques (INSEE). However, although the state really favoured thedevelopment of sociology teaching from 1958, the expansion since the mid-1980s ismore the unintended effect of the national policy for secondary education followed bythe Ministry of Education. There has been significant growth in the numbers of holdersof the baccalaurat ; the proportion of the cohort holding one has risen from 29% in1985 to 64% in 2005. Since in the French system obtaining the baccalaurat gives theright to university registration, with fees that have remained moderate in relation to

those charged by private higher educational institutions, this has led to an increase in thenumber of university registrations, especially in the human and social science depart-ments; the number of university places is not limited (except after the first year in medi-cal schools, which are more selective). This has also encouraged growth in the numberof holders of doctorates in sociology, who with the development of teaching of sociol-ogy find themselves in a paradoxical situation. On the one hand, PhD students andyoung people with recent doctorates often have a precarious position in the universities,

because they have to take on what are sometimes heavy teaching loads, and take workon research contracts, in order to fund their theses or to ensure future integration into

higher education teaching. On the other hand, they make a strong contribution to thevitality of research in the sociological journals and in the book market. In practice publication opportunities have increased, and the editors of collections and learned jour-nals often now publish the research reports of these early-career sociologists, especiallygiven that those already in post as professors are more involved in the ever-increasingnumber of administrative tasks.

The attraction of sociology is, then, the result of neither sociological strategy nor thereal political will of the state, but of state policy for secondary education, combined withthe selectivity of other forms of higher education such as the grandes coles , university

institutes of technology and private establishments. Thus a cleavage has progressivelyemerged between the mass teaching of sociology in the universities on one side, andtraining for sociological research in the prestigious and selective establishments ( Ecole

Normale Suprieure (ENS), Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (EHESS), Institut dEtudes Politiques (IEP)) where there are professors in sociology, though notmany. They have therefore been selected by members of other disciplines, and carry lit-tle weight in the decision-making of these prestigious establishments. Thus, as Chenu(2002 : 61) rightly notes, the process of creation of sociological elites largely avoids thecollegial game internal to sociology as a scientific discipline. The remit which the stategives to sociologists is in fact reduced mainly to the provision of university degrees insociology. If professors do some research, in addition to performing their role asteachers, so much the better, since they are supposed to do some. But the state doesnot guarantee to sociologists a specific licence to do sociological research, as it does forthe practice of medicine, reserved for medical doctors. This means that sociologists haveto struggle with other disciplines in the human and social sciences - not to mention other

http://csi.sagepub.com/http://csi.sagepub.com/http://csi.sagepub.com/


5/12

722 Current Sociology 60(5)

groups such as journalists or politicians - to support the legitimacy of their analyses ofsociety, and to stabilize the boundaries of their discipline. These boundaries alwaysseem uncertain and are in perpetual dispute, with geography, history, political science oranthropology depending on the epoch.

The funding of sociologyUrban sociologist Paul-Henri Chombart de Lauwe, recalling the difficult working con-ditions that he experienced at the Muse de lHomme up to the middle 1950s, empha-sised the relative penury of the social sciences in the immediate postwar period. Aninitial improvement in funding followed from the commissions launched by the Agence

Europenne de Productivit , and the Commissariat Gnral la Productivit at the Institut des Sciences Sociales du Travail (ISST). This institute for teaching and researchin the social sciences was created in 1951 by the Ministry of Labour and the Universityof Paris. As Lucie Tanguy (2008: 726) stresses, it was founded within the framework ofthe productivity policy promoted with the economic cooperation of the US MarshallPlan, and opened up a field of action where the Ministry of Work, and especially itsDirectorate on industrial relations, could set in motion research on work problems. Bycreating an institution which offered funding for empirical research projects the Ministryencouraged the growth of industrial sociology in France. It also encouraged it by send-ing French sociologists to the USA to study the work carried out there by sociologistson industrial relations. The ISST research section, set up in 1953, was made up of

industrial sociologists, most of them born in the second half of the 1920s, who playedan important role in the French sociology of following decades (they included, forinstance, Michel Crozier, Jean-Daniel Reynaud, AlainTouraine and Jean-Ren Tranton:all four were involved in the creation of the journal Sociologie du Travail (Borzeixand Rot, 2010). Crozier would be well known for his analysis of Le Phnomne

Bureaucratique (1963) and the development of the sociology of organizations in France.Touraine made himself known through research on the working class, and then onsocial movements (Masson, 2008). They found there a work situation very differentfrom the relative penury of the CNRS Centre dEtudes Sociologiques in the 1950s.

Research was undertaken on workers attitudes to technical change and its effects on theorganisation of work and payment systems, on the adaptation to work and the forms of participation of workers, on the vocational progress of young workers, and on thefunctioning of social security institutions and the relationship with their clients. Forexample, it was here that Michel Croziers study of tobacco manufacture and of officework in an insurance company was carried out.

There were two reasons for the importance of the ISST. First, it supported the devel-opment of empirical research on social problems of the day, of a sociology moreoriented to action, though, even if its researchers benefited from a real autonomy withinthe institute, that was not easily reconciled with the researchs dependence on officialcommissions (Tanguy, 2008: 756). Second, it contributed to the spread of the surveymodel, with its variables, testing of hypotheses, and sampling procedures, in Frenchsociology. Thus although they could make room for interviews and non-participantobservation, its work rested mainly on questionnaire studies. In that they differed from



6/12

Masson 723

the first monographs on the industrial sociology, carried out in the first half of the1950s, which rested largely on factory participant observation (Peneff, 1996). From this

point of view they anticipated the mode of enquiry that spread widely through otherspecialisms within sociology over following decades.

It was above all from the beginning of the 1960s that the provision of funding forsociology grew considerably, within the framework of the national Plan and with thesetting up of bodies with the remit to support the development of research. This provi-sion had no comparison with the funds to which sociologists had had access before, orwith what the CNRS allocated to its laboratories. The first three Five-Year Plans, before1961, had been Plans of modernisation and re-equipment, and had not been concernedwith the social sciences. Planning as a rational mode of governing public affairs startedin 1953, when the USA decided not to continue the Marshall Plan in France. The SecondPlan, which started in 1954, established its principal objective as the increase of pro-

duction, with prices and quality adequate from the point of view of opening frontiers.Research was to participate in the development effort, as long as that was associatedwith economic development. But the planners were thinking above all of research in thehard (and experimental) sciences. In the second half of the 1950s, the apparatus for

public funding of research was progressively created. The advent of the Fifth Republicopened a period of stability which was favourable for the development of planning of

public affairs. For obvious reasons, it was experimental and spatial research that benefited at first from most of the grants. It was, therefore, under the Fourth Plan(19621965) that the social sciences started to be widely funded, even if the funding

was modest as compared with that of the other sciences. The first plans defined other priorities reconstruction, the economy - and national research policy was only gradually put in place in the second half of the 1950s. The Fifth Republic gave it a decisiveimpetus, especially by the creation of the Dlgation Gnrale la RechercheScientifique et Technique (DGSRT), which managed the total set of research grantsfrom the different ministries.

The goal assigned, by the government ant the DGRST, to the human and socialsciences is particularly broad. It is to study the means of swift and balanced eco-nomic growth...; to ensure economic and social adaptation to accelerated technical

change; to satisfy the psycho-sociological needs of individuals at the same time astheir material and biological needs (Report of the DGRST, Centre des ArchivesContemporaines de Fontainebleau , CAC 1977 1624, article 23). In this setting thehuman sciences must, among other things, take into account the problems of teach-ing, of vocational training and employment, of the social economy of agriculture, ofurban structures and development, of the processes of economic growth, of regionalexpansion and under-development, of migration, and of the organisation of work andautomation. Besides these general considerations, the planners thought that a highrate of growth would produce a general increase in the standard of living and a reduc-tion in social inequality, leading to more peaceful social relations (Tanguy, 2002). ThePlan Commissioner nominated in 1959, Pierre Mass, hoped that social conflictwould be humanised, and the study of the mechanisms and conditions of economicgrowth, entrusted to sociologists, should make it possible to avoid imbalance andsocial and political conflict.



7/12


This first stage of the massive funding provided by the DGRST in the 1960s wasdecisive, because it contributed to the definition of the mode of funding which is stilldominant today in French sociology (Masson, 2006). Thus an original form of fundingwas chosen, one different from either the American model or the Russian state sociology.It is a form that combines a greater variety in the sources of funding (the Plan, adminis-trative bodies of governement, local administrative bodies, firms), often from public

bodies where the researchers take part along with members of other categories in the wayin which grants are allocated. These funds have no doubt contributed to the developmentof quantitative methods in sociology sampling and questionnaires look serious andscientific but they have not ended in defining a specific research formula which is sta-

ble for the longer term. The enquiries which followed the DGRST conventions adopteda research formula similar to that used in the second half of the 1950s, like the ISSTsstudies. On the other hand, this funding contributed to the introduction of a new, rather

general, research theme, that of the modernization of French society, which can be takenin two ways: the adaptation of the population to social and economic change, or theeffects of these changes. Then the effects on the provision of funding of the studentunrest of May 1968 were ambivalent. On the one side, they emphasize the critiques madeof contract research by one group of sociologists, particularly those of younger generationswho had been students in the first half of the 1960s. The planners themselves becamemore cautious about the benefits for their work of sociological studies, which seemed totake directions hardly compatible with their managerial concerns and their liberal ideas.On the other side, May 1968 did not interrupt the provision of funding, either in the

number of contracts signed or in their total value.The enquiries funded by the DGRST did not introduce into sociology major meth-odological innovations which would form part of the history of the discipline, becausethey followed a model which was already active. To the extent that they retained a verymarked empirical character, using few abstract analytical categories, they did not pro-

pose innovations which remain in the history of the discipline there either. However,DGRST funding did make an obvious contribution to its institutionalization. It favouredthe creation of research teams, sometimes set up within a centre or laboratory. It alsocontributed to the subdivision of the discipline into areas of specialization and to their

further development. Rural sociology, sociology of education, sociology of consump-tion, life styles, sociology of medicine, are all areas which became autonomous fromthis period with the incentive of this massive funding. In addition, the wider availabilityof grants also had indirect consequences for careers. It helped some people to gain rela-tive independence from the great patrons of the discipline, while it gave career oppor-tunities and professional socialisation to younger members.

At the end of the 1960s, other bodies took up the baton from the DGRST. Some,such as the Comit dOrganisation des Recherches Appliques sur le Dveloppement

Economique et Social (CORDES), were transversal bodies across administrative sec-tions and arose from the Plan, others were created by ministries which had graduallydeveloped research sections or directorates, like the Mission Recherche, established in1961 by the Ministry of National Solidarity, which invited bids for grants. Certainly therelationship with the social sciences, and with sociology in particular, has varied withthe colour of the government, and for researchers it has also varied, in ways no doubtdue more to the economic situation of the day than to a deliberate political decision.



8/12

Masson 725

Gradually this particular mode of funding, on the basis of a public call for applications,which used to be seen by sociologists as a supplement to the insufficient funding oftheir protecting ministry, has become the ordinary system and the main source for thelaboratories, to the point where contract research is considered the norm, and aninformel positive criterion in career evaluation. But fundamentally the system remainsthe same. From the 1980s, funding sources have become more diversified, involvingnew bodies. Laws of decentralization in 1982, and the emergence of territorial group-ings (regions, federations of municipalities or urban areas) have created new partnersto offer project funding for sociologists; these have also encouraged sociologists to beinterested in taking into account the local dimension of sociological phenomena, andhave contributed to the popularity of ethnographic approaches, although there havealso been other reasons for the latter. In the 2000s, the European Union also became anew actor in the funding of projects, and thus European comparisons became com-

moner in sociological research. On the other hand, sociologists are less in evidence inthe great institutions for the production of statistical data; a division of labour hasemerged in which the latter produce the data on which sociologists work.

The indirect effects of sociological work If the state has contributed to defining the setting for the activities of French sociologists,have they not had some influence on the states policies and reforms since the 1960s?The significant funding of sociology, in the form of research contracts with various

public bodies, has contributed to the emergence of the figure of the expert and, more broadly, to the involvement of sociologists in sectoral policies such as those for schools.Their participation has taken at least three different forms since the Second World War.

A first mode of involvement follows from their membership of ministerial or admin-istrative committees; the sociologist there plays the role of advisor, more easily if s/heis socially and academically close to the senior civil servants with whom s/he can speakas an equal. This situation was typical in the period from 1950 to 1970, when the firstsociologists benefited from the status of intellectual, a model embodied by Jean-PaulSartre. Sociologists such as Georges Friedmann also participated from the mid-1950s,

in the context of reforms in the organization of pupil pathways in secondary education(Chapoulie, 2006), but their influence there was very limited. Other sociologists, suchas Raymon Aron and Michel Crozier, had influence which was a little more important.Aron, who combined his past of professor with that of journalist on Le Figaro , was amember of several government commissions. Membership in political clubs favouredrelations with politicians and senior civil servants; Michel Crozier is a good example ofthis. Among his generation (he was born in 1922), civic involvement was taken forgranted, and he acknowledges that he was strongly influenced by Sartre. His involve-ment was mainly shown in his active participation in the Club Jean Moulin. This wasfounded in 1958, and it was a club for political discussion whose participants includedseveral senior civil servants, intellectuals, journalists and newspaper editors, prfets and sous-prfets some of whom would make political careers, and politicians. He

pressed there for administrative reform. His participation helped the diffusion of his book Le Phnomne Bureaucratique , and opened doors to him for further studies withinthe administration. He found himself at a point of convergence between his research on



9/12


organisation and the modernising goals of the senior civil servants in the Plan plus thearrival at administrative responsibility in roles such as prfet of new generationsstrongly influenced by what they had heard at the Ecole Nationale de lAdministration or the Institut des Sciences Politiques of Paris, both expanding greatly in the 1960s. Theevolution of personnel work in firms and of human relations services, as well as thedevelopment of schools training groups suitable for employment in such services, alsofavoured the reception of Le Phnomne Bureaucratique . Finally, there was a conver-gence between the sociology of organizations proposed by Crozier, which lookedtowards expertise and advice for the managerial concerns of politicians or the firm, andthe interest for the people in power exemplified by the network of relations among themembers of the Club Jean Moulin , the general magazine Esprit , and politicians andsenior civil servants.

The influence of sociologists could take a second, yet more indirect, form. This rests

on the audience that they can find among mid-level managers, and the wide distributionof their findings. Pierre Bourdieu is a good example of this. The relations in the 1960s

between Bourdieu and his team within the Centre de Sociologie Europenne (CSE) andthe statisticians in charge of the INSEE led to exchanges of statistical methods of analysisof data and, above all, to the transfer of the definitions of problems, and the diffusionof sociological concepts in studies of social statistics (Seibel and Oeuvrard, 2005 : 87).It was at the beginning of his career, during his time in Algeria between 1958 and 1962,that Bourdieu made contact with INSEE statisticians such as Alain Darbel and ClaudeSeibel. After meeting Bourdieu, Darbel contributed to the planning and production of

several of Bourdieu and his teams statistical enquiries at the CSE, in particular Lamourde lArt (1966). He also drafted the annexe on the measurement of the probabilities ofaccess to higher education of Les Hritiers (1964). At INSEE, in 1973 he launched thecollection Donnes Sociales of statistical analyses by theme. This was largely inspired

by the plan of a work that he had produced with Bourdieu a few years earlier; thathad analysed the continuity of social inequality despite the economic growth throughthe thirty glorious years of 1945-1975 ( Le Partage des Bnfices , 1966). But above allhe helped to diffuse the concepts created by Bourdieu among INSEEs statisticians. Thiswas probably facilitated by Bourdieus teaching at the Ecole Nationale de la Statistique

et de lAdministration Economique (ENSAE) from 1964; it was from this backgroundthat several INSEE administrators held internships with Bourdieu at the CSE.Bourdieus influence was also carried by the big circulations of some of his books,

such as Les Hritiers . Like other disciplines such as linguistics, history and anthropology,sociology in the 1960s and 1970s aroused great interest among the cultivated public.First of all, the development of schooling in secondary and then higher education, obvi-ously played an important role in the diffusion of the social sciences in the 1960s, leadingto the appearance of a readership capable of being interested by sociological works.Many private publishers then set up collections suitable for the inclusion of sociologicalworks, such as the Le sens commun, collection directed by Bourdieu for Editions deMinuit, or the one directed by Henri Mendras for Armand Colin. During the 1960s sev-eral works in this way became classics of French empirical sociology, thanks to reachingan audience wider than the narrow circle of specialists. Among those were Le Phnomne

Bureaucratique (Michel Crozier, 1963), Les Hritiers (Pierre Bourdieu and Jean-ClaudePasseron, 1964), La Conscience Ouvrire (Alain Touraine, 1966), Commune en France.



10/12

Masson 727

La Mtamorphose de Plodmet (Edgar Morin, 1967), La Fin des Paysans (HenriMendras, 1967), La Reproduction (Pierre Bourdieu and Jean-Claude Passeron, 1970),

LEcole Capitaliste en France (Christian Baudelot and Roger Establet, 1971).Bourdieu and Passerons Les Hritiers contributed to the public recognition of the

existence of educational inequalities according to social class (Chapoulie, Kourchid,Robert and Sohn, 2005 : 117). The national Ministry of Education was aware of thoseinequalities, and had already produced some statistical data on the subject, and beforeBourdieu and Passerons book there had also been, since the mid-1950s, several arti-cles by demographers from the Institut National des Etudes Dmographiques . However,the book offered a new analytical framework, showing the mechanisms producing theempirical patterns that were already known. The educational inequalities were nolonger seen as a simple consequence of the inequality of economic resources betweenfamilies; they were understood in terms of the functioning of the educational institu-

tions and the relationship that each class had to that. The events of May 1968 contrib-uted to the books success, and opened a phase when a more critical view of the schoolwas predominant. For some time, Bourdieu and Passerons analyses thus dominatedthe discussion of educational inequalities.

A third mode of involvement appeared after 20 years, that of specialized expertise.Bourdieu was probably one of the last examples in French sociology of the generalist,who published in a number of fields and who put forward a theory which claimed toaccount for the functioning of society as a whole. The growth of sociology had encour-aged specialization in narrower and narrower fields. The generalist became rarer, and

that stance surely gave lower professional returns. In addition, the publishing marketfor books on social science has been profoundly transformed with, to put it simply, themarked increase in small works of synthesis on a precise topic (such as sociology of

prisons, sociology of the hospital). These are aimed at a wider public, especiallylyce students and undergraduates, at the expense of the publication of research reports,especially when those take the form of a monograph. The mass university has, since the1980s, led to a significant growth in the number of university teachers, and perhaps toa broadening of their social recruitment, at least in social science disciplines such associology. At the same time, however, their status in relation to the states senior civil

servants has been devalued. To the extent that specialization has increased, expertise becomes more technical. It is not in the name of a general theory or of a particularapproach to the social that sociologists are consulted, nor does it owe anything to theirsocial and educational proximity to elected politicians and senior civil servants. It is,rather, in the name of their specialized knowledge of a narrower field that their contri-

bution is possibly drawn on. But it is difficult now, in the absence of empirical studies,to grasp the range of their influence.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial ornot-for-profit sectors.

Acknowledgements

I thank Jennifer Platt for the important work of translation of the french version of this paper.



11/12


References

Amiot M (1986) Contre lEtat, les sociologues: lments pour une histoire de la sociologie urbaineen France, 1900 1980 . Paris: Editions de lEHESS.

Baudelot C and Establet R (1971) Lcole capitaliste en France . Paris: Maspero.Bezes P (ed) (2005) LEtat lpreuve des sciences sociales. La fonction recherche dans les

administrations sous la V e Rpublique . Paris: La Dcouverte.Bourdieu P and Darbel A (1966) Lamour de lart . Paris: Editions de Minuit.Bourdieu P and Passeron J-C (1964) Les Hritiers . Paris: Les Editions de Minuit.Bourdieu P and Passeron J-C (1970) La reproduction . Paris: Editions de Minuit.Bulmer M (1984) The Chicago School of Sociology. Institutionnalization, Diversity, and the Rise

of Sociological Research . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Borzeix A and Rot G (2010) Gense dune discipline, naissance dune revue: Sociologie du

travail . Paris: Presses Universitaires de Paris Ouest.Chapoulie J-M (1991) La seconde fondation de la sociologie franaise, les Etats-Unis et la classe

ouvrire, Revue franaise de sociologie 32(4): 321-364.Chapoulie J-M (2001) La tradition sociologique de Chicago. 1892 1961 . Paris: Seuil.Chapoulie J-M, Kourchid O, Robert J-L and Sohn A-M (eds.) (2005) Sociologues et sociologies.

La France des annes 1960 . Paris: LHarmattan.Chapoulie J-M (2006) Les nouveaux spcialistes des sciences sociales comme experts de la

politique scolaire en France (1945-1962), Genses 64: 124-145.Chenu A (2002) Une institution sans intention. La sociologie en France depuis laprs-guerre,

Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales 141-142: 46-61.Crozier M (1963) Le phnomne bureaucratique . Paris: Seuil.Fisher D (1993) Fundamental Development of the Social Sciences. Rockefeller Philanthropy and

the United States Social Science Research Council . Ann Arbor, MI: The University of MichiganPress.

Heilbron J (1991) Pionniers par dfaut ? Les dbuts de la recherche au Centre dtudes sociologiques(1946-1960), Revue franaise de sociologie 32(2): 365-379.

Karady V (1976) Durkheim, les sciences sociales et lUniversit : bilan dun semi-chec, Revue franaise de sociologie 27(2): 267-312.

Masson P (2006) Le financement de la sociologie franaise : les conventions de recherche de laDGRST dans les annes soixante, Genses , n 62: 110-128.

Masson P (2008) Faire de la sociologie. Les grandes enqutes franaises depuis 1945 . Paris : LaDcouverte.

Mendras H (1967) La fin des paysans. Innovations et changements dans lagriculture franaise .Paris: SEDEIS, Collection Futuribles.

Morin E (1969) Commune en France. La mtamorphose de Plodemet . Paris : Fayard.Peneff J (1996) Les dbuts de lobservation participante ou les premiers sociologues en usine,

Sociologie du travail 31(2): 25-44.Prost A (1989) Les origines de la politique de la recherche en France (1938-1958), Cahiers pour

lhistoire du CNRS , n1: 41-62.Seibel C and Oeuvrard F (2005) Le dveloppement des tudes sociales dans le systme statistique

public. In Chapoulie J-M, Kourchid O, Robert J-L and Sohn A-M (eds) Sociologues et sociologies. La France des annes 60 . Paris: LHarmattan.

Tanguy L (2002) La mise en quivalence de la formation avec lemploi dans les IV e et V e Plans(1962-1970), Revue franaise de sociologie 43(4): 685-709.

Tanguy L (2008) Retour sur lhistoire de la sociologie du travail en France: place et rle delInstitut des sciences sociales du travail, Revue franaise de sociologie 49(4): 723-761.

Touraine A (1966) La conscience ouvrire . Paris: Le Seuil.



12/12

Masson 729

Author biographies

Philippe Masson is Matre de confrences en sociologie at the University of Nantes (France). Hisinterests concern the sociology of education, the sociology of medecine and the history of sociol-ogy. His recent book is, Faire de la Sociologie. Les Grandes Enqutes Franaises depuis 1945 ,Paris: Editions La Dcouverte, 2008.

RsumCet article examine le rle de lEtat dans le dveloppement de la sociologie franaiseaprs 1945. Ce rle a t important pour linstitutionalisation de la discipline. LEtata favoris la cration dquipes, de centres et de laboratoires de recherche. LEtat aaussi promu le financement de la sociologie franaise. Ce financement, sous la formede contrats de recherche signs avec diffrentes institutions publiques, a contribu lmergence de la figure du spcialiste et, de manire plus large, lengagement dessociologues dans les politiques sectorielles.

Mots-clssociologie franaise, financement, Etat, institutionalisation

ResumenEste paper examina el papel del estado en el desarrollo de la Sociologa francesadespus de 1945. Dicho papel fue importante en la institucionalizacin de la disciplina,favoreci la creacin de equipos de investigacin, centros de investigacin o labora-

torios. Adems, el Estado favoreci el financiamiento de la Sociologa francesa. Dichofinanciamiento, en forma de contratos de investigacin con varios organismos pblicos,ha contribuido para la emergencia de la figura del experto y, ms ampliamente, para laparticipacin de socilogos en polticas sectoriales.

Palabras clavesociologa francesa, financiamiento, Estado, institucionalizacin


French Sociology and State

Documents

Transcript of French Sociology and State