Marcos Gonzalez Hernando
Lecturer in Social Theory and Research Methods, UCL Social Research Institute (2021-)
Senior Researcher, FEPS-TASC (2018-2020)
Visiting Teaching Fellow, University of Bath (2019-2020)
Managing Editor, Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory (2019-2020)
Visiting Lecturer, City, University of London (2016-2017)
PhD Sociology, University of Cambridge (2012-2017)
MSc Culture and Society, London School of Economics (2010-2011)
MA Critical and Creative Analysis, Goldsmiths UoL (2009-2010)
Licenciado en Antropología Social, Universidad de Chile (2004-2008)
Editor Jefe @ www.ballotage.cl (2011-2017)
Supervisors: Patrick Baert
Senior Researcher, FEPS-TASC (2018-2020)
Visiting Teaching Fellow, University of Bath (2019-2020)
Managing Editor, Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory (2019-2020)
Visiting Lecturer, City, University of London (2016-2017)
PhD Sociology, University of Cambridge (2012-2017)
MSc Culture and Society, London School of Economics (2010-2011)
MA Critical and Creative Analysis, Goldsmiths UoL (2009-2010)
Licenciado en Antropología Social, Universidad de Chile (2004-2008)
Editor Jefe @ www.ballotage.cl (2011-2017)
Supervisors: Patrick Baert
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (36)
Uploads
Books by Marcos Gonzalez Hernando
British Think Tanks After the 2008 Global Financial Crisis connects sociological thinking on knowledge with research on policy change and the economic debate, through careful analysis of interviews, public accounts, and the ‘products’ of think tanks themselves.
González Hernando argues that demands for knowledge and advice that arose after the crisis energised the work of all four think tanks while also exposing internal tensions, affecting their sources of funding, transforming their institutional structure, and shaping how they engage with their audiences. It will appeal to students and scholars of sociology of knowledge, political sociology, policy studies, economic history, communication, political economy, organisational sociology, and British politics.
This book emphasises the crucial importance of generational experience as a wellspring for progressive social change. For it is the young generations who have come of age in a world marred by crises that are at the forefront of challenging the status quo.
With insight into new social movements and protests in the UK, Canada, Greece and Ukraine, this stimulating collection of works will be invaluable for those teaching, studying and campaigning for alternatives. It will also be of relevance to scholars in social movement studies, the sociology and anthropology of economic life, the sociology of education, social and political theory, and political sociology.
Papers by Marcos Gonzalez Hernando
Book Chapters by Marcos Gonzalez Hernando
Book Reviews by Marcos Gonzalez Hernando
Drafts by Marcos Gonzalez Hernando
Conference Material by Marcos Gonzalez Hernando
Welcome, also, to the Department of Sociology, at the University of Cambridge.
Have the hopes of “alternative horizons” been dashed through a failure to turn crisis into social change?
Following the success of the first Cambridge Graduate Conference in Sociology on Crisis and Social Change: Towards Alternative Horizons, this year’s edition will seek to explore in what way the defining issues of our time may be the longing for security and the fear of insecurity. A post-9/11 world has brought an increased focus on national security, surveillance and policing. Not to be undone, the forces of capitalism unleashed new contradictions expressed in growing inequality, welfare retrenchment, and unemployment in the wake of the Great Recession. Meanwhile, multivalent manifestations of (in)security continue unchecked where states and dominant groups treat black, Muslim, female, migrant, or other bodies as security threats.
The purpose of this conference is not only to interrogate if security and insecurity intersect but to provide bold answers as to how. To arrive at such answers, we draw upon the sociological legacies of critique, including deconstruction and reconstruction, negation and vision, exploring both the macro and micro regimes of power. But, abstract though they may sometimes be, such answers share one important aim: a greater understanding of society. As Pierre Bourdieu so aptly stated:
“The function of sociology, as of every science, is to reveal that which is hidden.” We hope you enjoy the conference.
The Graduate Sociology Conference Committee 2015
British Think Tanks After the 2008 Global Financial Crisis connects sociological thinking on knowledge with research on policy change and the economic debate, through careful analysis of interviews, public accounts, and the ‘products’ of think tanks themselves.
González Hernando argues that demands for knowledge and advice that arose after the crisis energised the work of all four think tanks while also exposing internal tensions, affecting their sources of funding, transforming their institutional structure, and shaping how they engage with their audiences. It will appeal to students and scholars of sociology of knowledge, political sociology, policy studies, economic history, communication, political economy, organisational sociology, and British politics.
This book emphasises the crucial importance of generational experience as a wellspring for progressive social change. For it is the young generations who have come of age in a world marred by crises that are at the forefront of challenging the status quo.
With insight into new social movements and protests in the UK, Canada, Greece and Ukraine, this stimulating collection of works will be invaluable for those teaching, studying and campaigning for alternatives. It will also be of relevance to scholars in social movement studies, the sociology and anthropology of economic life, the sociology of education, social and political theory, and political sociology.
Welcome, also, to the Department of Sociology, at the University of Cambridge.
Have the hopes of “alternative horizons” been dashed through a failure to turn crisis into social change?
Following the success of the first Cambridge Graduate Conference in Sociology on Crisis and Social Change: Towards Alternative Horizons, this year’s edition will seek to explore in what way the defining issues of our time may be the longing for security and the fear of insecurity. A post-9/11 world has brought an increased focus on national security, surveillance and policing. Not to be undone, the forces of capitalism unleashed new contradictions expressed in growing inequality, welfare retrenchment, and unemployment in the wake of the Great Recession. Meanwhile, multivalent manifestations of (in)security continue unchecked where states and dominant groups treat black, Muslim, female, migrant, or other bodies as security threats.
The purpose of this conference is not only to interrogate if security and insecurity intersect but to provide bold answers as to how. To arrive at such answers, we draw upon the sociological legacies of critique, including deconstruction and reconstruction, negation and vision, exploring both the macro and micro regimes of power. But, abstract though they may sometimes be, such answers share one important aim: a greater understanding of society. As Pierre Bourdieu so aptly stated:
“The function of sociology, as of every science, is to reveal that which is hidden.” We hope you enjoy the conference.
The Graduate Sociology Conference Committee 2015
Deadline September 30, 2015
Think tanks are becoming ever more relevant policy actors in much of the world, even if their organisational diversity renders their contours difficult to define. Originally circumscribed to the Anglo-American sphere, think tanks are now ubiquitous in places as far between as Brussels, Beijing, Nairobi and Santiago. In the process, they have become significant actors in informing and framing public policy debates, as well as being part of elite networks inside a polity. As a consequence, many sociologists and political scientists argue that think tanks can help the legitimation of particular policy agendas – sometimes aligned with their funders – thus helping to blur the distinction between interests and knowledge.
Hence, over the past decades, policy institutes have become significant agents to research, as their murky character – hovering over the edges of academia, the media, economic interests and politics – allows them to use a diverse array of credentials, styles of public performance, intellectual tools and strategies in their efforts to attain political relevance. Moreover, their effectiveness – even for those seen as little more than lobbies – depends on seeming credible and respectable across audiences. This makes these organisations sociologically fascinating, as they make manifest the complex connection between political and economic institutions and the intellectual sphere.
We accept submissions that confront these issues and the tensions underpinning think tanks from both theoretical and empirical standpoints, exploring their role in modern political systems and, more broadly, the part played by professional expertise and advocacy organisations in modern policymaking.
Think tanks, or policy institutes, are garnering ever more attention within the public debate, and have become major actors across several polities. Thus, in the last years there has been a growing interest in researching these organisations, particularly within Sociology and Political Science. As such, there have been several efforts in understanding what they are and what they do: from the perspective of their work and impact in policymaking (be it in healthcare, education, foreign policy, etc.); their role as public intellectuals and in the ‘battle of ideas’; from the standpoint of the national and international networks they are part of; and from the point of view of their funding and organisational structure, to name but a few.
Conversely, several methodological approaches could and have been applied to study these institutions. Researchers have focused on their intellectual output, policy impact and its members, on their funders, political allies and presence across the media landscape. One could employ a network analysis, critical discourse analysis, or grounded theory approach to study them, across reports, blog posts, interviews, surveys or tweets.
What is the nature of the crisis we are living through?
Does it represent an historical rupture, or just ‘history repeating itself’?
What diagnoses does the crisis raise?
What exactly is wrong with societies today?
How should those wrongs be righted?
To what end?
What kind of future would we like to build?
What horizons are in view?
Which future should we strive for?
The purpose of this conference is not only to ask such questions, but to provide bold answers to them. Such answers, drawing upon the legacies of critique, may range from diagnosis to treatment, from deconstruction to reconstruction, from negation to vision. But, abstract though they may sometimes be, such answers share one important aim: to bring us from crisis to progress.
We hope you enjoy the conference.
The Crisis and Social Change Conference Team
Notoriously hard to define, the diverse and murky organisations referred to as think-tanks continue to be both significant and controversial actors in policy development across the globe. Interest in these groups stems from their institutional ambidexterity. At once a think-tank can be found to hold prominent positions within policy networks while seen to have dependencies on public, private, and third sector donors. Similarly, think-tanks might stress their relationships with academia and their alignment with political parties or ideological cliques within such groups. Hence, think-tanks are simultaneously referred to as case studies of benign knowledge brokers and smoke-screens for elite interests.
Irrespective of their scholarly or political dispositions, in order to achieve public legitimacy and policy relevance, think-tanks and their employees must continually perform professional competencies spanning academia, politics, media, and business. This raises the following questions:
How do think-tanks perform this hybrid intellectualism?
How do they create knowledge?
How might differing national contexts with their particular media, political, business, and academic ecologies influence these activities?
The panel will address these questions by focussing on the practices of think-tanks and their staff. Specifically, we invite contributions which illuminate:
the construction, maintenance, and deployment of interpersonal/inter-organisational networks from across the policy-knowledge-media-business nexus
the processes and politics of knowledge production including, fundraising and research dissemination
the rhetorical strategies which are devised and enacted through a think-tank’s public and/or private interventions
We encourage both theoretical and empirical submissions, studies which reflect upon specific organisations, networks or individuals, and will accept submissions about think-tanks from across the organisational and ideological spectrum. The panel does not have a specific regional focus, but we particularly encourage scholars with interests in think-tanks of the MENA, Latin American, or East Asian regions to submit.
Objectives and Scientific Relevance of the panels
In the past thirty years, think-tanks have attracted considerable attention within public debate and academia. Within the social and political sciences, academics have attempted to classify these organisations, trace their development in specific polities, and understand their role and impact on party politics and public policy.
Though important, this scholarship has overlooked two key areas of research. First, the wider literature tends to neglect how think-tanks conduct their daily activities and make knowledge claims (McLevey, 2014). Secondly, researchers have often failed to investigate intellectual life within think-tanks, and have tended to present a simplistic image of the expert-cum-political advisor, or the elite puppet (Medvetz, 2012). This is due, in part, to previous scholarship’s cursory appreciation of the interstitial location of think-tanks between academia, the media, business, and politics. As such, we concur with Plehwe’s observation that think-tanks remain “the most arcane and least understood” aspect of the policy-interest nexus (Plehwe, 2014, p. 108).
In response, this panel’s prime objective is to facilitate deeper reflections on the hybrid mode of intellectualism associated with think-tanks. Our session’s second objective is to stimulate research which focusses on the actual practices of think-tanks. Such an approach has invigorated research within the sociology of knowledge (Camic, Gross & Lamont, 2011), and we expect to encourage similar developments within the field of think-tank studies. Concomitantly, our third objective is to act as a hub for interdisciplinary learning, bringing together contributions from across the social and political sciences as well as science and technology studies.
Finally, this panel will make a significant contribution to the comparative study of knowledge regimes (Campbell & Pedersen, 2011). Think-tanks operate across the globe, yet the knowledge regime literature has tended to concentrate on a select group of Euro-American polities. This panel seeks contributions from the developing world alongside those from developed/Anglo-American studies. Secondly, the distinct focus on think-tanks and their intellectual practices in action is novel approach, as studies of regimes have predominantly taken a historical perspective. In sum, we aim to expand the scholarly understanding of knowledge regimes by illuminating how policy-knowledge actors, in this case think-tanks, navigate their institutional landscape, and how this landscape shapes their practice.
References
Camic, C., Gross, N., & Lamont, M. (2011). Social knowledge in the making. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press,.
Campbell, J., & Pedersen, O. (2011). Knowledge Regimes and Comparative Political Economy. In D. Béland & R. H. Cox (Eds.), Ideas and Politics in Social Science Research. Oxford University Press.
McLevey, J. (2014). Think Tanks, Funding, and the Politics of Policy Knowledge in Canada. Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue Canadienne de Sociologie, 51:1, 54–75.
Medvetz, T. (2012). Think tanks in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Plehwe, D. (2014). Think tank networks and the knowledge–interest nexus: the case of climate change. Critical Policy Studies, 8:1, 101–115.
The research itself involved quantitative data analysis and conducting interviews with sample populations in the four countries. Many studies of inequality have concentrated on the status of the wealthiest 1% versus the other 99%. The purpose of this project was to analyse the relative economic position and perceptions of economic security and inequality of, not only the top 1%, but the remaining segment of the top 10% too. The project also explores what this population believes should be done, if anything, about inequality in general and to help themselves and their families.