Studi di Sociologia: journal, articles, subscriptions


Journal of Sociology

The journal was established in 1963 by the then Principal of the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Francesco Vito, who served as editor in chief until 1968. Vincenzo Cesareo has been the editor since 1976. In the late 1960s, when the journal was founded, sociological studies and research were growing in importance in Italian academia and the journal history reflects this cultural climate. Developing along with the evolution of the sociological debate in Italy and abroad, "Studi di Sociologia" publishes theory and research articles written by the most successful scholars. It also plays an important role in promoting young researchers.

Editorial and peer review process
The contributions submitted to "Studi di Sociologia" are anonymously reviewed by scholars expert in the field; the review process includes an initial screening by the editorial team and a double-blind peer review process.

Aim & Scope
The journal aims at:

  • debating and proposing sociologically relevant issues at national and international level;
  • promoting sound intellectual exchange between different perspectives within the social sciences, between different theoretical and methodological approaches and between different generations of scholars;
  • promoting theoretical and empirical research about the widest range of sociological topics;
  • informing the development of policies and practices.
Anvur, Indexing and Databases 
ISSN carta: 0039-291X
ISSN digitale: 1827-7896

In this issue


Società, natura e resilienza. Un’introduzione
by Alfredo Alietti, Dario Padovan pages: 8 € 6.00
Resilience: Towards an Interdisciplinary Synthesis?
by Julian Reid pages: 15 € 6.00
The concept of resilience is increasingly influential across the sciences but discussions of its significance between different fields of science remain under-developed. In the social sciences there is much debate as to the value of  resilience, and while some proponents of the concept are enthusiastic about it, many have dismissed it as an element of the ideology of neoliberalism. In the life sciences by contrast, and especially in the field of neurobiology, the  message concerning resilience has been much more upbeat and yet also more profound. To the extent that it is rare to encounter research which questions the basic ontology of the concept. This gulf in perspectives and approaches  between the social and the life sciences raises important questions. Why is there so much critique of resilience in the social sciences and so little in the life sciences? Is it possible to build bridges between the biological affirmation of  resilience and its social scientific critique? This article explores potential answers to these and related questions.
Resilienza comunitaria: dalla definizione teorica alle dimensioni empiriche. Esiti di una scoping review
by Michele Marzulli, Nicoletta Pavesi pages: 13 € 6.00
The academic and public success of the term resilience, which has also risen to a paradigm of public intervention in the economy with the Italian NextGenEU plan (PNRR), lies in some ways in its indefiniteness. While this indefinite  character makes the term usable in different contexts, it also risks emptying it of meaning, qualifying much of social intervention as capable of producing “resilience”. The paper presents the results of a scoping review conducted  through the analysis of English-language articles indexed in Sociological Abstracts whose topic is the operationalization of the concept of community resilience. Through an analysis of the texts obtained by querying the Sociological  abstracts DB, the research first highlights the dimensions that are used in research to assess how resilient a community is: alongside the traditional dimensions of physical infrastructure, socio-economic aspects and institutional  aspects, the dimensions of transformation and learning emerged as new. From a methodological point of view, the analysis made it possible to verify the development of participatory processes in the construction of community  resilience indicators, processes that not only allow for greater contextualization of the indicators, but also foster the creation of communities that are competent and engaged in being resilient.
Resilienza come strategia neoliberista: tra spiegazione e superamento
by Cleto Corposanto, Umberto Pagano pages: 11 € 6.00
Over the past fifteen years, the concept of resilience has gained prominence in academia and practical management. Some even consider it the organizing principle of contemporary political life. Resilience is hailed as a solution to  diverse issues, from international governance to climate change. Its popularity is intertwined with complexity epistemologies. However, within social sciences, concerns have arisen. Resilience’s application to social systems requires a  stronger theoretical underpinning, free from functionalist paradigms. There are reservations about its handling of conflicts, knowledge, and power dynamics. The concept implies adaptation to external events, potentially sidelining  proactive interventions. Critics argue that resilience reinforces a neoliberal rationality, accentuating individual and community responsibility, and potentially diminishing social protection. It can function instrumentally, normalizing  vulnerability and encouraging self-surveillance. This paper engages with these critiques, aiming to move beyond ideological criticism and embrace a pragmatic approach to advance resilience in social sciences.
Sulla resilienza. Appunti per una sociologia dei sistemi socio-ecologici
by Davide Grasso, Claudio Marciano, Alessandro Sciullo pages: 13 € 6.00
Like a virus making a species jump, the concept of resilience has been the protagonist of an impressive interdisciplinary spill over. This article focuses on the difficulties of including this concept in the epistemic plane of the social  sciences, and proposes an analysis of the limitations encountered when it is applied beyond physical and natural systems, in contexts characterised by components and regulatory processes at a different level of ontological  stratification, such as Socio-Ecological Systems (ESS). The contribution is structured in three parts: the first focuses on the interdisciplinary genealogy of the concept and the reflections that have attempted to interpret the causes,  modalities and effects of its growing relevance for the social sciences. The second addresses some interpretative problems and proposes possible theoretical and methodological solutions oriented towards the inclusion of resilience in  the domain of the social sciences. The last part delves into the case of a peculiar ESS such as that of mountainous inland areas, in which the dynamics of resilience are observed from an inverted perspective compared to the  traditional one, namely by conceiving repopulation phenomena as trauma, rather than depopulation.
Where Resilience Fails: Transformative Agency in Liminal Spaces
by Licinia Pascucci, Andrea Taffuri pages: 16 € 6.00
With the incredible rise of multifaceted socio-ecological crises, the concept of resilience has seen such a cross-cutting diffusion in both academic and policy arenas, resulting in a panacea incapable of translating the intricacies and  geometries of power embedded in societal complex systems. This conceptual vagueness, rather than unintentional, constitutes an explicit strategy within the new neoliberal design that conceals the power domination over marginal  communities, particularly border crossers. Drawing on qualitative, field-based research held in Lesvos (GR), this paper wants to deconstruct the techno-managerial appropriation of the resilience concept, particularly underlying  the  several criticalities in terms of socio-spatial segregation and punitive management of marginality that could arise from it. Therefore, it will investigate why and to what extent the actual EU migration policies and narratives, by  framing migration flows as a sort of resilient adaptation strategies, represent a necropolitical strategy that implies the control and the reshaping of bodies, cultures, social roles, and agencies, through different domination strategies.  Opposed to the top-down hegemonic apparatus, different forms of resilience are created by migrants in the liminal space in which they create, reshape, and produce new space and values. We will conclude with a reframing of  resilience under a more comprehensive and systemic view that can represent an exercise of affirmative biopolitics of cross-border communities and rethink borderlands as a space of new multiple possibilities and identities.

Enter the code to activate the service.