IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Développement durable et contribution de la méthode EBP en sciences sociales : une ébauche



Are scientific arguments used for analysing "sustainable development"? This issue is at the core of the EBP-biosoc research project of which we present a few aspects on the use of scientific knowledge through "Evidence Based Policy" method. The use of such a framework in social sciences requires taking account of pluralism of approaches in order to have an idea of the validity spectrum of the possible empirical knowledge to be exploited. The notion of research programme of Lakatos can give an account of pluralism inside a given discipline. This contribution gives a presentation of EBP method and proposes a sketching out of its application to social sciences through an attempt to characterise the regulation school theory with the Lakatosian concepts, which gives clues about the type of empirical knowledge that can be expected from this framework. Al last, this is applied to the link between agriculture and economic cohesion

Suggested Citation

  • Philippe Légé & Bruno Tinel, 2010. "Développement durable et contribution de la méthode EBP en sciences sociales : une ébauche," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 10081, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
  • Handle: RePEc:mse:cesdoc:10081

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Zuindeau, Bertrand, 2007. "Regulation School and environment: Theoretical proposals and avenues of research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 281-290, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Sustainable development; research programme; evidence based policy; pluralism;

    JEL classification:

    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mse:cesdoc:10081. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Lucie Label). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.