Sociology in Sweden

A History

Anna Larsson, Sanja Magdaleni?

• Publisher: Palgrave Pivot
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN:
  9781349572908
  9781137482297
• eBook ISBN:
  9781137482310
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

This book offers a brief but comprehensive overview of the history of sociology in Sweden from the prewar period to the present day. It focuses in particular on scientific boundaries, gender and the relationship between sociology and the Swedish welfare state.

1

Introduction

Abstract: The present volume offers a brief but comprehensive overview of the history of sociology in Sweden. After recounting its pre-war background, the book ranges from sociology’s establishment in the Swedish university system in the 1940s and 1950s, over the critical 1960s, through the crises of the 1970s and 1980s to the challenges posed by transformations in Swedish society and university organization in the 1990s and 2000s. The authors focus on scientific boundaries, gender and the relationship between sociology and the Swedish welfare state.

Keywords: boundaries; gender; Swedish welfare state; periodization

Larsson, Anna and Sanja Magdalenić. Sociology in Sweden: A History. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. DOI: 10.1057/9781137482310.0003.

This volume presents a brief history of the discipline of sociology in Sweden. The establishment of Swedish sociology is largely a postwar phenomenon, although previous attempts and predecessors worth mention certainly exist. Since the establishment of university departments and professorships in the late 1940s – a crucial period in terms of its academic validization – sociology has undergone an evolution often accompanied by expansion. However, periods of growth in quantity of research as well as number of students and teaching positions have alternated with periods of stagnation and quantitative decline. The late 1960s, for example, witnessed enormous growth after which the slowdown of the 1970s and 1980s was conceptualized as a severe crisis. Developments in recent decades have been variously linked to new ideals of university management, the partial dismantling of the welfare state and globalization.

Various attempts have been made to outline the development of sociology in Sweden by means of periodization. An early example came about in the effort to create a distinct profile for the discipline in the 1940s. The actors who succeeded in establishing sociology as an academic discipline in the late 1940s constructed a “modern” sociology based on the scientific ideal and a perception of empirical research as synonymous with quantitative methodology, thus setting a distinct boundary against what was previously defined as “theoretical, speculative” sociology (SOU, 1946; cf. Larsson & Wisselgren, 2006).

In the late 1980s, Katrin Fridjónsdóttir (1987) identified three key periods in the development of academic sociology: disciplinary formation in the 1940s and 1950s; consolidation and expansion in the 1950s and 1960s; and reorientation in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

Another mode of outlining its development is by noting the particular theoretical orientations that dominated sociology in successive periods. Göran Ahrne (2007) pointed out that the evolution of sociology could be divided into three distinct periods based on its view of the relationship between society and the individual. During the first period, which ranged from the 1950s to mid-1960s, the dominating view was that individuals should adapt to the society. The development of Swedish society was taken for granted, and the overriding issue explored by sociologists was the individual’s adjustment to aspects of modernity such as industrialization and urbanization. During the second period, which lasted from the mid-1960s to mid-1980s, the opposite was the case: how should society adapt to the individual? How should the workplace, housing and neighborhoods be organized so as to enhance quality of life? The third period began in the mid-1980s, when the manner in which individuals adapted themselves to other individuals dominated. In other words, relationships between individuals – men and women, ethnic groups as well as “insiders” and “outsiders” rather than individuals and institutions – were the focus of concern.

Hedvig Ekerwald (2014a) proposed periodization based on two revolutions in sociology, both relating to theoretical orientation. One took place in the wake of the upheavals of 1968, which facilitated the incursion of qualitative methods earlier than other social sciences. The other occurred at the turn of the millennium when, influenced by the international boom in social constructionism, sociology’s gaze turned away from material to ideational aspects, thus opening up to intersectionality and poststructuralism. Simultaneously, a stable core has been maintained since 1947 – evaluation research, which though affected by the above-mentioned revolutions, has changed little over time. This key aspect is mainly oriented toward the study of labor, education and the health sector. Hence, the development of sociology is characterized by an uneven but intertwined configuration of continuity and change.

Periodization may provide a general idea about how sociology evolved over time and space, but it is bound to lead to simplification (Ahrne, 1997). In practice, evolution is seldom clearly discernible. Different, competing perspectives, change and continuity, may peacefully coexist with little or no knowledge of one another. With this in mind, the present volume will embark from the pre-war background and then range over academic establishment in the Swedish university system in the 1940s and 1950s, over the radical critique and crises of the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s to the new challenges posed by Swedish and global society in the 1990s and 2000s. These events – academic establishment, crisis/reorientation and the recent restructuring – are presented as the three major shifts in the history of Swedish sociology.

A compressed history like this can only follow a few lines of thought and provide a small number of examples. We have chosen three perspectives as guiding principles. The first is scientific boundaries and their making, which opens a discussion on the focus and preferred orientation of sociology, and on the conflicts and tensions within the discipline. Boundary making, or “boundary work”, has proven essential to the formation of the disciplinary landscape of the natural and social sciences (Gieryn, 1983; Gieryn, 1999). Focus on boundaries is useful since, as Lamont and Molnár (2002: 181) conclude, they “are conditions not only for separation and exclusion but also for communication, exchange, bridging, and inclusion”. In order to highlight the specificities of the Swedish development, we have looked for expressions of boundary making at work and analyzed how they were formed, maintained and transformed, when they appeared and the outcomes they effected. Both interdisciplinary and intradisciplinary boundaries are taken into account.

A second perspective focuses on the issue of gender. In general (Smith, 1987, 1990) and many other national contexts (Yeo, 1996), existing literature presents a history of sociology by focusing on male sociologists (as professors and/or agents of institutionalization), failing to pay any significant attention to the impact of gender on its development and structure (Magdalenić, 2004). We draw attention to the conditions that men and women respectively worked under, how it affected their careers and how it changed over time. Gender is explored in relation to inter- and intradisciplinary boundary making as well as to the gender equity policy of the Swedish welfare state.

The third perspective concentrates on the interconnection between the Swedish welfare state and the social sciences and scientists, a relationship that has been characterized by interdependence and mutual trust for most of the 20th century. It has been noted that this kind of social context not only shaped the disciplinary representatives’ understanding of themselves through the direct reception and application of research results, but also influenced the discipline “in terms of delimiting the very domain of research and in defining what counts and what does not count as an acceptable solution to the research problems within that domain” (Fridjónsdóttir, 1991: 248). This relationship is discussed both in general terms and in relation to its specific implications for gender and boundary issues.

By appraising the history of Swedish sociology from this trio of perspectives, the resulting analysis has the potential of not only providing an overview of past events but also shedding new light on previously overlooked dimensions. A further ambition of ours is to reveal the contested nature of historiography itself, since the history of sociology in Sweden can be, and has been, understood and described in many different ways.

The book is partially based on previous overviews of the history of Swedish sociology (including Gullberg, 1972; Fridjónsdóttir, 1987, 1991; Allardt et al., 1988). We also draw on existing research on the development of sociology (Boalt et al., 1976; Ekerwald, 2000; Wisselgren, 2000, 2013), including our own work (Larsson, 2001; Larsson & Wisselgren, 2006; Larsson, 2008; Larsson & Suolinna, 2009; Magdalenić, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008). Primary sources include official government reports, material from university archives and the archives of the Swedish Sociological Association, peer review evaluations of sociology as a discipline, autobiographical accounts written by sociologists (Croner, 1966; Fridjónsdóttir, 1987; Widerberg, 1995; Bengtsson & Molander, 1998; Andersson, Brante & Edling, 2014), interviews with sociologists, and notes from conferences and meetings. Quotations from primary and secondary sources in Swedish have been translated by us if not otherwise indicated. Although we have adopted a restrictive style, reference to previous research is provided throughout.

Our own particular research interests are to some extent reflected in the history we have compiled. The earliest part of the story (Chapters 2, 3 and 4, written mainly by Larsson) tends to focus on the ideas and rhetoric that guided the formation of the discipline of sociology in Sweden. The latter half of the book (Chapters 5, 6 and 7, written mainly by Magdalenić) concerns the period after an academic and institutional structure was set in place, and focuses more on how the ideas and rhetoric of sociology were implemented as institutional and organizational practices and how they evolved over time. However, we hope that this brief overview will give the reader a glimpse of some of the characteristics of the history of the discipline of sociology in Sweden.

2

Disciplinary Precursors and Burgeoning Interest

Abstract: Sociology was first institutionalized in Sweden with the creation of a chair at Gothenburg University College, held by evolutionary sociologist and economist Gustaf Steffen between 1903 and 1929. Although the discipline lost its institutional foothold when Steffen died, interest in sociology continued to grow in both academic and political circles. In the 1930s, sociology was viewed as a boon to modern Sweden. Rapid social development – the basis for the notion that Sweden might function as a laboratory for the social sciences – actualized issues that sociology seemed best equipped to answer, and the discipline became closely associated with Social Democratic ideals.

Keywords: Gustaf Steffen; Gunnar Aspelin; practical philosophy; Alva Myrdal; Gunnar Myrdal; Institute of Social Science

Larsson, Anna and Sanja Magdalenić. Sociology in Sweden: A History. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. DOI: 10.1057/9781137482310.0004.

Sociology was established as an autonomous academic discipline in Sweden when Torgny T. Segerstedt assumed a new chair at Uppsala University in 1947. The discipline has undergone rapid growth and expansion ever since, and its “birth” has occasionally been celebrated by the Swedish Sociological Association (Fridjónsdóttir ed., 1987; Hansen et al. ed., 1997). This foundation story, while naturally a simplification is also partly incorrect (Larsson & Wisselgren, 2006).

There had been numerous attempts before 1947 to discuss sociological issues, including the highly topical “social question”, and establish sociology as an academic discipline in Sweden. These are crucial to later developments and therefore need to be recognized in the history of the discipline. They also shed light on the international exchange of ideas through which sociology evolved.

There is a link between the classic sociology of Britain’s Harriet Martineau (1802–76) and Swedish contemporaries, such as Fredrika Bremer, Erik Gustaf Geijer, C. J. L. Almqvist and Victoria Benedictsson interested in social, economic and political issues, who discussed her ideas and work (Magdalenić, 2008). Martineau’s ideas were also made available to the larger audience through translation and reviews in prominent journals of the time. Moreover, in the autumn of 1837, the liberal newspaper Aftonbladet published her views on slavery. The broader context within which these discussions took place was influenced by debate on women’s social status (including the right to work and vote), constitutional reform, popular education, poverty and democracy in America. Martineau was even invited to Sweden to act as a consultant on political constitutions (Hoecker-Drysdale, 1992: 160).

Furthermore, in the autumn of 1888, the first public social science lectures were held at Stockholm University College (Wisselgren, 2013). These lectures comprised two parallel series delivered by well-known international scholars. Professor of Law and later first chair of sociology in Russia, Maxim Kovalevsky, gave 16 lectures on “The Evolution of the Family and Property Rights”. The other series, 20 lectures in total, was delivered by French economist Ludovic Beauchet on the topic “The Relationship Between the Individual and the State in Economics”. The lectures attracted large audiences and were covered by the media. The Stockholm daily Dagens Nyheter reported, “the lecture theatre is being filled, not of course by too many ladies, but by too few gentlemen” (Wisselgren, 2013: 37). That the audience consisted of predominantly women is an indication that women actively participated in the formation of social science in Sweden at its earliest stages.

Finally, there was in fact a chair in sociology long before 1947. In 1903, a chair in sociology combined with political economy was created at Gothenburg University College, filled by Gustaf Steffen, who thereby became the first professor of sociology in Sweden.

The first professor

The creation of this chair must be understood in light of the rapid social changes Sweden underwent at the time. Industrialization, urbanization and modernization had triggered social reform efforts and a burgeoning interest in social knowledge production. The “social question” embraced topical class-related problems of poverty, social tension, unemployment, housing and emigration, and authors, journalists, physicians and teachers united in the desire to find new ways to understand and regulate the social arena. To back up their call for reform, those involved often referred to the lack of factual knowledge about social conditions in Swedish society (Wisselgren, 2000).

The new chair in Gothenburg was the first in Sweden, and one of the earliest in Europe designated as “sociology”. At the outset of the 20th century, there were four universities in Sweden. Two of them were the full state universities in Uppsala and Lund. The other two were the university colleges in Gothenburg and Stockholm, which though functioning very much like the full ones were partly privately founded and funded and somewhat less regulated. This meant that the latter were free to create new subjects. While political economy was taught at the universities of Uppsala and Lund, the board of the university college in Gothenburg wanted to create a broader subject by combining political economy and sociology. The goal was a general social science in which basic studies of society could be conducted. Thus sociology was regarded as an equal partner in this merger (Lindberg & Nilsson, 1996).

Not many were qualified to hold such a professorship, but Gustaf Steffen (1864–1929) was a perfect fit. In fact, the chair was created with him in mind (Wisselgren, 1997: 99). After studies in science and a career in journalism, Steffen had studied social science for a decade in Germany, England and Italy. His research abroad had provided him with the merits necessary to assume the chair (Steffen, 1895, 1899, 1900).

Like most of his contemporary European colleagues, Steffen subscribed to an evolutionary perspective, which entailed knowing the history and development of a society in order to understand its contemporary state. As professor, Steffen wrote several books in which his view on sociology is evident: sociology is a general and fundamental social science (Steffen, 1905, 1907, 1910–11, 1917). Other social science disciplines were specialized in order to deal with specific aspects of society, political history, economics, statistics and religion. In contrast, sociology focused on the most general and fundamental social relationships. In turn, the specialized disciplines depended on sociology for their most basic theoretical principles. But sociology was also to provide a synthesis of the research results of said disciplines. Thus sociology is both a theory of all the social sciences and a comprehensive, synthesizing science exploring the generic aspects of all social phenomena (Steffen, 1917). Steffen also detects a practical and normative side of sociology, as it provides guidance for action. A sociologist is, according to Steffen, driven by the will to improve society (Steffen, 1905: 17, 20). With Steffen, the Swedish discourse on sociology acquired a fulcrum and a temporal institutional home in the first decades of the 20th century.

During the interwar years, the evolutionary paradigm lost its leading position and eventually became overtaken. Against the background of World War I, the idea of the superiority of the European civilization was challenged and faith in progress diminished. This led to a crisis in sociology (Wagner, 1991; Connell...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• 1  Introduction
• 2  Disciplinary Precursors and Burgeoning Interest
• 3  Establishing a Scientific Discipline
• 4  Boundaries under Construction
• 5  Rise, Fall and Reorientation
• 6  Expansion, Fragmentation and Export of Knowledge
• 7  Reclaiming Sociological Expertise
• 8  Conclusion
• References
• Index