1.

Global Knowledge Production in the Social Sciences (Hanafi, 2016)

a) Reviews the book edited by Wiebke Keim et al, Global Knowledge Production
in the Social Sciences: Made in Circulation (2014)
b) Hanafi argues that post-colonial studies alone is not enough to explain the
events in Arab countries (e.g. Arab Spring, Syrian Refugees)
c) Scholars have reduced these events to Post-colonial studies fails to capture
how decades of authoritarianism have also shaped knowledge production.
d) epistemologies are not just shaped by colonialism but also by the "local power
dynamics"
e) Post-authoritarian studies are needed to better understand Arab countries.
2. “Introduction” in Knowledge Production in the Arab World (Hanafi, 2015)
a) There were two phases in 20th century, national science and globalized
science. The latter is was an attempt to connect the products of the previous
phase as it lead to the hegemony of a few scientific communities.
b) Two engines of globalization: Institutionalization of research and the local
scientific community
c) Hanafi believes the promise of globalization to science is impossible.
1. One has to be “qualified” to enter the knowledge economy
2. Research must be redefined according to standard, which makes it
irrelevant to their country.
“Thus, the production of knowledge was put on the agenda, and joined,
not unexpectedly, the interests of enterprises, promoters of a more
competitive economy and the World Bank in the promotion of a
knowledge economy. Thus, the issue was no longer only that of
expanding awareness of the importance of knowledge in society, but
that of competitiveness of the Arab economies, through the promotion
of a knowledge economy.” (8)
3. “Brain-dead country”
3. Who frames the debate on the Arab uprisings? Analysis of Arabic, English, and
French academic scholarship. (Hanafi, 2015)
 a) A three level hierarchy exists in knowledge production.
1. 1st level: Most cited are those from Ivy League schools and are considered
the experts of the field.
2. 2nd level: Less prestigious scholars who are not often recognized for their
theoretical contribution.
3. 3rd level: Local scholars who cite only the first level scholars and speak
and write in Arabic.
b) First level produces exerts hegemony over knowledge production and third
level producers are not heard in the international arena.
4. “The marginalization of the Arab language in social science: Structural
constraints and dependency by choice.” (Hanafi, 2014)
a) Inequel proportions in publications reflect the hierarchy in knowledge
production
b) Most articles use English and this determines the audience and the research
paradigm itself; reality is perceived in terms of English instead of the local
language.
c) The hegemony of English excludes local publications written in Arabic thus
limiting contribution of different perspectives in knowledge production.
References
Hanafi, Safi. 2016. “Global Knowledge Production in the Social Sciences: A critical
assessment.” Journal of the Brazilian Sociological Society 2(1): 16-30

Hanafi, Sari and Rigas Arvanitis. 2014. “The marginalization of the Arab language in
social science: Structural constraints and dependency by choice.” Current Sociology
62(5): 723-742.

Hanafi, Sari and Rigas Arvanitis. 2015. “Introduction” Pp. 1-20 in Knowledge Production
in the Arab World. London: Routledge.

Hanafi, Sari., Jean-Philippe Cointet, Rigas Arvanitis and Nada AlMaghlouth. 2015. “Who
frames the debate on the Arab uprisings? Analysis of Arabic, English, and French
academic scholarship.” International Sociology 30(4): 418-441.