In this conclusion we explore three issues. First, are there any ‘in principle’ objections to relevance that stand up? Our answer is a clear no. Second, what is stopping political science being relevant and how could the chances of relevance be increased? Here our answer is more nuanced and reflects several of the issues raised throughout the book. Third, we conclude the book with a new manifesto for relevance. Here we echo some of the arguments made by David Easton in 1969 in his call for a credo of relevance but argue that rather than an implied trade-off between methodological rigour and relevance the two need to go hand in hand alongside a broad commitment to methodological pluralism.
Swipe to navigate through the chapters of this book
Please log in to get access to this content
To get access to this content you need the following product:
B. Guy Peters
- Macmillan Education UK
- Sequence number