Tomasz Michalski

Abstract

The system transformation has brought about significant changes in the system of science in Poland. There was a clear increase in the importance of top-down funding for defined areas of applied science and support for the transfer of results to the economy, resulting from the decision-makers belief in the idea of a knowledge-based economy, which was gaining popularity at the time. In the latest (post-2018) iteration of these reforms, the application criterion for evaluating scientific units has undergone deeper formalisation in the reorganised structure of fields and disciplines of science. The disciplines of socio-economic geography and spatial management – the common institutional framework for territorially sensitive research conducted so far in different disciplines – were created.

This article aims to characterise the impact of socio-economic geography and spatial management on the environment. So far, scholars have not studied this issue about the set of actors that make up the newly established discipline. The main data source was the structured dataset about the applicational performance of scientific bodies required in the evaluation process. It contained information about 17 universities and research and development institutes that reported 38 descriptions of scientific impact on socio-economic development. The descriptions consisted of information on impact issues, geographical scale, form of impact, the role of entities in the formation of impact, practical functions and interdisciplinarity. The acquired qualitative information was required using a secondary qualitative analysis method, particularly a comparative truth table.

The results confirmed the important role of the discipline in activities for the social and economic environment, particularly in the programming of interventions concerning elements of territorial capital and in raising the praxeological quality of territorially oriented policies. The dominance of the cultural, diagnostic and decision-making functions corresponded to the main strengths of applied human geography and planning – territorial sensitivity and the ability to integrate knowledge and coordinate the processes of its creation and dissemination. At the applied level, the subjects showed a wide range and high intensity of cooperation with other disciplines, which also seems to bode well for integrating the new discipline.

It is worth emphasising that the results obtained do not so much depict the totality of resources and the capacity of socio-economic geography and spatial management to meet the challenges of civilisation, i.e. the supply of research services. They represent only a fragment of the demand created by the socio-economic environment to which the discipline was able to respond. In this sense, it is the most relevant fragment, although it is possible to analyse it through the prism of the specific conditions of the evaluation procedure, posing the risk of over-generalisation and consistency of this picture.

In addition to the results presented, issues require further research questions. In the context of the inevitability and dynamics of anthropogenic climate change, the question of the subjectivity and causality of the research units that make up the analysed discipline seems crucial. Does the impact on the environment meet the challenges identified and have a transformative character, or does it rather serve to reproduce the dominant socio-technological regimes? This question implies another. What is the efficiency of the decision-making function exercised by the evaluated actors? The discipline's theoretical, conceptual and methodological apparatus offers various diagnostic possibilities. By its very nature, the decision-making activity, fraught with risk and uncertainty of future events and considering heterogeneous criteria of stakeholder rationality, is challenging for applying scientific knowledge. The third question concerns the integration factors of the new discipline. Is it the fundamental research or the practical activity that is crucial to it?

Keywords: applied science, socio-economic geography and spatial management, human geography and plan- ning, evaluation of science, Poland

Maciej Tarkowski [maciej.tarkowski@ug.edu.pl], Uniwersytet Gdański, Instytut Geografii Społeczno-Ekonomicznej i Gospodarki Przestrzennej
Tomasz Michalski [tomasz.michalski@ug.edu.p], Uniwersytet Gdański, Instytut Geografii Społeczno-Ekonomicznej i Gospodarki Przestrzennej
Marcin Połom [marcin.polom@ug.edu.pl], Uniwersytet Gdański, Instytut Geografii Społeczno-Ekonomicznej i Gospodarki Przestrzennej

Citation

APA: Tarkowski, M., Michalski, T., & Połom, M. (2023). Stosowana geografia społeczno-ekonomiczna i gospodarka przestrzenna w świetle trzeciego kryterium ewaluacji jakości działalności naukowej. Przegląd Geograficzny, 95(1), 5-27. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.1
MLA: Tarkowski, Maciej, et al. "Stosowana geografia społeczno-ekonomiczna i gospodarka przestrzenna w świetle trzeciego kryterium ewaluacji jakości działalności naukowej". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 95, no. 1, 2023, pp. 5-27. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.1
Chicago: Tarkowski, Maciej, Michalski, Tomasz, and Połom, Marcin. "Stosowana geografia społeczno-ekonomiczna i gospodarka przestrzenna w świetle trzeciego kryterium ewaluacji jakości działalności naukowej". Przegląd Geograficzny 95, no. 1 (2023): 5-27. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.1
Harvard: Tarkowski, M., Michalski, T., & Połom, M. 2023. "Stosowana geografia społeczno-ekonomiczna i gospodarka przestrzenna w świetle trzeciego kryterium ewaluacji jakości działalności naukowej". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 5-27. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2023.1.1