Sociology and Political Science of Public Problems

Summary

Sociology and political science have studied social problems in two very different ways over the past five decades. On the one hand, US sociology has been moving toward a constructionist stance. After a functionalist era, the study of social problems was redefined with greater scientific rigor as the study of claims-makers’ activities. Propelled by the Society for the Study of Social Problems (SSSP), this approach became a “normal science” in sociology in the 1970s. It yielded a wealth of knowledge about the various types of claims-makers, their strategies, and their rhetoric. However, it paid less attention to the transformation of claims and mobilizations into policies. On the other hand, poltiical science has brought new insights on social problems and their institutions. The debate between elitists and pluralists in the 1960s paved the way for a parallel approach to that of sociologists. Were the social problems given equal chances to be debated and translated into policies, or were some of them blocked by hidden filters? Research on agendas strengthened political science contributions by questioning the connections between the agendas of opinion, the media, and policies. Later, the growing importance of comparative research improved our understanding of national differences. However, the sociology and political science of social problems evolved in parallel, with few conceptual exchanges and weak connections between claims-making and agenda setting, frames and agendas, bottom-up mobilizations and top-down policy-making.

Despite the influence of US social science, there was almost nothing in Europe coined as social problems studies. A short trip into French academia suggests the key to such mystery. Here, a dense and specific network of connections between disciplines has enabled innovative research on social problems, but under different names and disciplinary labels. Beyond this case, the conclusion is clear: social problems studies need more interdisciplinary connections. They must mobilize theories and authors, such as Joseph Gusfield, who offer bridging approaches. They must address the challenges of a globalization of social problems, of the increasing complexity of social interdependencies.