Why political ontology must be experimentalized: On eco-show homes as devices of participation

Social Studies of Science

Volumn 43, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 417-443

  Marres, Noortje ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

actor network theory; empirical devices; environmental engagement; object oriented political philosophy; political ontology; politics of objects; public demonstrations

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878830119     PISSN: 03063127     EISSN: 14603659     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0306312712475255     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Asdal K.On politics and the little tools of democracy: A down to earth approach.Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory. 2008;19 (1): 11-26.
2. Barry AThe Politics of Display: Museums, Science, Culture. Macdonald S, ed. London: Routledge; 1998:85-102.
3. Barry APolitical Machines: Governing a Technological Society. London: Athlone Press; 2001:.
4. Bennett JVibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 2010:.
5. Bijker WE,Bijsterveld K.Women walking through plans: Technology, democracy, and gender identity.Technology and Culture. 2000;41 (3): 485-515.
6. Blok A,Bertilsson MDenmark: University of Copenhagen; 2009:.
7. Blumenberg H.Shipwreck with Spectator: Paradigm of a Metaphor for Existence. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1996:.
8. Blumenberg HShipwreck with Spectator: Paradigm of a Metaphor for Existence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1997:.
9. Political Matter: Technoscience, Democracy, and Public Life. Braun BWhatmore SJ, ed. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press; 2010:.
10. Brown MScience in Democracy: Expertise, Institutions, and Representation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2009:.
11. Callon M,Rabeharisoa V.Gino's lesson on humanity: Genetics, mutual entanglements and the sociologist's role.Economy and Society. 2004;33 (1): 1-27.
12. Callon M,Lascoumes P,Barthe YAgir dans un Monde Incertain. Essai sur la Démocratie Technique. Paris: Seuil; 2001:.
13. Bringing Technology Home: Gender and Technology in a Changing Europe. Cockburn CFürst-Dilić R, ed. Milton Keynes: Open University Press; 1994:.
14. Cussins C.Ontological choreography: Agency through objectification in infertility clinics.Social Studies of Science. 1996;26 (3): 575-610.
15. Danyi E.Materiality & politics: Or the parliament as an STS object. Paper presented at the Institute for European Ethnology; 2010Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany; 2010.
16. De Vries G.What is political in sub-politics? How Aristotle might help STS.Social Studies of Science. 2007;37 (5): 781-809.
17. Dobson ACitizenship and the Environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2003:.
18. Frost SLessons from a Materialist Thinker: Hobbesian Reflections on Ethics and Politics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press; 2008:.
19. GanzevlesJ (2007) Technologie voor mens en milieu: Een actor-netwerk analyse van de ontwikkeling van energietechnologie voor woningen. PhD Thesis, University of Twente, The Netherlands.
20. Garfinkel HStudies in Ethnomethodology. Oxford: Polity Press; 1984:.
21. Girard M,Stark DGovernance and Information Technology: From Electronic Government to Information Government. Mayer-Schönberger VLazer D, ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2007:145-176.
22. Gomart E.Methadone: Six effects in search of a substance.Social Studies of Science. 2002;32 (1): 93-135.
23. Guy S,Moore SSustainable Architectures: Cultures and Natures in Europe and North America. London: Spon Press; 2005:.
24. Hacking IRepresenting and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press; 1983:.
25. Hacking IHistorical Ontology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2004:.
26. Inside the Politics of Technology: Agency and Normativity in the Co-production of Technology and Society. Harbers H, ed. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press; 2005:.
27. Harman GPrince of Networks: Bruno Latour and Metaphysics. Melbourne, VIC, Australia: Re.press; 2009:.
28. Hawkins GThe Ethics of Waste: How We Relate to Rubbish. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers; 2006:.
29. Hawkins G.Packaging water: Plastic bottles as market and public devices.Economy and Society. 2011;40 (4): 534-552.
30. Hobson K.Bins, bulbs, and shower timers: On the 'techno-ethics' of sustainable living.Ethics, Place & Environment. 2006;9 (3): 317-336.
31. Irwin A.The politics of talk: Coming to terms with the 'new' scientific governance.Social Studies of Science. 2006;36 (2): 299-320.
32. Irwin A,Michael MScience, Social Theory and Public Knowledge. Milton Keynes: Open University Press; 2003:.
33. Jasanoff SDesigns on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2005:.
34. Jasanoff S.A new climate for society.Theory, Culture & Society. 2010;27 (2-3): 233-253.
35. Jimenez AIntroduction to Prototyping. Jimenez A, ed.
36. Kelty C.Geeks, internets and recursive publics.Cultural Anthropology. 2005;20 (2): 185-214.
37. Latour BThe Pasteurization of France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1988:.
38. Latour BPandora's Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1999:.
39. Latour BMaking Things Public; Atmospheres of Democracy. Latour BWeibel P, ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2005a:14-43.
40. Latour BRe assembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005b:.
41. Law JAfter Method: Mess in Social Science Research. London: Routledge; 2004:.
42. LawJ (2009) Collateral realities (version of 29 December 2009). Available at: http://www.heterogeneities.net/publications/Law2009CollateralRealities.pdf (accessed 16 June 2012).
43. Science and Citizens: Globalization and the Challenge of Engagement. Leach MScoones IWynne B, ed. London: Zed Books; 2005:.
44. Lezaun JMarket Devices. Callon MMillo YMuniesa F, ed. Oxford: Blackwell; 2007:130-151.
45. Lezaun J.Offshore democracy: Launch and landfall of a socio-technical experiment.Economy and Society. 2011;40 (4): 553-581.
46. Lovell H.Exploring the role of materials in policy change: Innovation in low energy housing in the UK.Environment and Planning A. 2007;39 (10): 2500-2517.
47. Lury C,Wakeford NInventive Methods: The Happening of the Social. London: Routledge; 2012:.
48. Marres N.Making things public; Atmospheres of democracy. Latour BWeibel P, ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2005:208-217.
49. Marres N.The issues deserve more credit: Pragmatist contributions to the study of public involvement in controversy.Social Studies of Science. 2007;37 (5): 759-780.
50. Marres N.Testing powers of engagement: Green living experiments, the ontological turn and the undoability of involvement.European Journal of Social Theory. 2009;12 (1): 117-133.
51. Marres N.The costs of public involvement: Everyday devices of carbon accounting and the materialization of participation.Economy and Society. 2011;40 (4): 510-533.
52. Marres NMaterial Participation: Technology, the Environment and Everyday Publics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2012a:.
53. Marres NInventive Methods: The Happening of the Social. Lury CWakeford N, ed. London: Routledge; 2012b:76-95.
54. Marres N,Lezaun J.Materials and devices of the public: An introduction.Economy and Society. 2011;40 (4): 489-509.
55. Michael Mike,Gaver William.Home Beyond Home: Dwelling With Threshold Devices.Space and Culture. 2009;12 (3): 359-370.
56. Miller CA.New civic epistemologies of quantification: Making sense of indicators of local and global sustainability.Science Technology & Human Values. 2005;30 (3): 403-432.
57. Mol AActor-Network Theory and After. Law JHassard J, ed. Oxford: Blackwell; 1999:74-89.
58. Mol AThe Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 2002:.
59. Muniesa F.,Linhardt D.Trials of explicitness in the implementation of public management reform.Critical Perspectives on Accounting. 2011;22 (6): 550-566.
60. Murphy MBuilding Sickness Syndrome and the Problem of Uncertainty: Environmental Politics, Technoscience and Women's Workers. Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 2006:.
61. Oswell DUK: Department of Sociology, Goldsmiths College, University of London; 2008:.
62. Papadopoulous D.Alter-ontologies: Towards a constituent politics in technoscience.Social Studies of Science. 2010;41 (2): 177-201.
63. Shapin S,Schaffer SLeviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1989:.
64. SuchmanL (2005) Agencies in technology design: Feminist reconfigurations. Available at: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/sociology/papers/suchman-agenciestechnodesign.pdf (accessed 10 August 2012).
65. Verbeek PWhat Things Do: Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press; 2005:.
66. Verbeek PMoralizing Technology: Understanding and Designing the Morality of Things. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press; 2011:.
67. Woolgar SA Disobedient Generation. Turner SSica A, ed. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press; 2005:309-324.
68. Woolgar S,Lezaun J.The wrong bin bag: A turn to ontology in science and technology studies?.Social Studies of Science. 2013;43 (3): 321-340.