Transcript Alexander Kesselring - Challenge Social Innovation

Do non-humans make a
difference?
Potentials and problems in applying
Bruno Latour‘s Actor-Network-Theory
to the study of (social) innovation
Alexander Degelsegger
Alexander Kesselring
Assumptions and Intentions
• All innovations are „social processes“
• One general innovation theory comprising
„technical“ as well as „social“ innovation
• An innovation theory and research methodology
allowing to understand the relation between
innovation processes and social change
2
The basic assumptions of
Actor-Network-Theory (ANT)
Assumption 1:
“Any thing that does modify a state of affairs by making a difference is
an actor” (Latour 2007: 71).
Assumption 2:
It is necessary to include non-human actors in sociological
explanations of action and structure
Assumption 3:
The “social” is not an entity, but a relation between actors that forms a
network
Assumption 4:
In performing this relationship, actors are transformed as is the
meaning or force that is transported
3
Innovation as an arrangement between
human and non-human actors
• “The social ‘material’ and the technical ‘material’
are both relatively malleable and the successful
innovation is the one which stabilises an
acceptable arrangement between human
actors (users, negotiators, repairers) and the
non-human actors (electrones, tubes,
batteries) at the same time. The particular
strength to the innovator is to permanently play
with both registers, to treat nature and society
symmetrically” (Akrich/Callon/Latour 2002,
210)
4
“Action is overtaken”
Actions are...
• Distributed among actors: different entities
(human, non-human)
• Distributed across space: what is acting at the
same moment in any place is coming from many
other places, many distant materials, and many
faraway actors
• Distributed over time: elements have been
produced at different times
5
A network is...
• a point-to-point connection which is
physically traceable and thus can be
recorded empirically
• a connection that is not made for free, it
requires effort (“transaction costs”)
• a connection where any “meaning” or
“force” that is transported is also
“translated”
• mediators vs intermediaries
6
The Micro – Meso – Macro
differentiation is...
• no well ordered zoom
• produced by actors (“globalisers” and
“localisers”)
Latour’s answer:
• flat social world
• no society/context – content distinction in
description/explanation
7
Structure as action?
• Understanding „constraint“ as actor-network
• To be „under constraint“ means to be part of an
actor-network
• Actor-networks can be more or less stabilised
and stabilisation relies on different actors and
different relations between actors
• Processes of stabilisation and de-stabilisation
can be identified
8
Empirical approach
• map out controversies
over agency
• Identify actors
• defining trajectories
by actants’
association and
substitution
[…] (9) roll film instead of plate
film/ camera using the films //
nothing other than heavy
cameras using plate films
exists on the market […]
(11) Eastman/Walker/high status
company/commercial network
[…]
(14) paper/gelatin -//- fragile […]
(18) early 1884 continuous paper
machine for serial printing […]
(26) film not good for
professionals, good for
amateurs
(31) triumphant reception -//- film
still fragile
9
Potentials...
• All innovations are studied with the same
sociological language
• The inclusion of non-human actors in
sociological analysis, in particular the analysis of
„social innovations“
• A stronger focus on relations and the process of
translation
• A possible way to resolve the micro-meso-macro
differentiation
• A possible way to resolve the agency – structure
polarisation
• A focus on transformation, innovation and
political action
10
...and Problems
• Does ANT provide a theoretical and methodological
concept for interpreting human accounts?
• Does ANT explain the attribution of agency? Is agency
constituted by attribution?
• Most non-human actors are made by humans - Does
ANT provide a theoretical and methodological concept
for interpreting human objectivations?
• Is ANT providing empirical tools that are appropriate for
studying human and non-human actors with a „higher
resolution“?
11
Implications for innovation theory
• Innovation introduces new actors and/or changes the
relation between actors and the actors themselves
• Actor-networks as process medium, constraint, target
and outcome of innovation
• Intentions and meanings are always “translated” and are
likely to change during the innovation process
• A sociology of innovation that describes relations,
processes and actors in a balanced way.
• An innovation theory that understands resistence to
change as well as change
• Innovation theory and social theory become more
interdisciplinary.
12
Assumptions and Intentions
• All innovations are „social processes“
• One general innovation theory comprising
„technical“ as well as „social“ innovation
• An innovation theory and research methodology
allowing to understand the relation between
innovation processes and social change
13
Thank you for your attention!
Contact:
Alexander Degelsegger
[email protected]
Alexander Kesselring
[email protected]
Centre for Social Innovation
Linke Wienzeile 246, A-1150 Vienna. Austria.
www.zsi.at
14