The Mundane Politics of ‘Security Research’
Tailoring Research Problems
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.61021Abstract
Since the late 20th century, Germany’s federal science policy has shifted towards an emphasis on commercialization and/or applicability of academic research. University researchers working within such strategic funding schemes then have to balance commitments to their government commission, their research, and their academic careers, which can often be at odds with each other. Drawing on an ethnographic study of the development of a ‘smart’ video surveillance system, I analyze some of the strategies which have helped a government-funded, transdisciplinary group of researchers to navigate conflicting expectations from their government, academia, and the wider public in their everyday work. To varying degrees, they managed to align conflicting expectations from the government and their departments by tailoring research problems which were able to travel across different social worlds. By drawing attention to work practices ‘on the ground’, this article contributes ethnographic detail to the question of how researchers construct scientific problems under pressures to make their work relevant for societal and commercial purposes.
References
Akrich M (1992) The De-Scription of Technical Objects. In Bijker WE & Law J (eds) Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 205–224.
Baumeler C (2009) Entkopplung von Wissenschaft und Anwendung: Eine neo-institutionalistische Analyse der unternehmerischen Universität. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 38(1): 68–84.
https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-2009-0104
Boardman C & Bozeman B (2007) Role Strain in University Research Centers. The Journal of Higher Education 78(4): 430–463.
https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2007.0020
Bowker GC (2008) Memory Practices in the Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bowker GC & Star SL (2000) Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (2007) Forschung für die zivile Sicherheit: Programm der Bundesregierung. Bonn, Berlin.
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (2012) Forschung für die zivile Sicherheit 2012–2017: Rahmenprogramm der Bundesregierung. Bonn, Berlin. http://www.bmbf.de/pub/rahmenprogramm_sicherheitsforschung_2012.pdf.
Calvert J (2006) What's Special about Basic Research? Science, Technology & Human Values 31(2): 199–220.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243905283642
Clarke AE (1991) Social Worlds/Arenas Theory as Organizational Theory. In Maines DR (ed) Social Organization and Social Process: Essays in Honor of Anselm Strauss. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter, 119–158.
Clarke AE (1998) Disciplining Reproduction: Modernity, American Life Sciences, and 'the Problems of Sex'. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Clarke AE (2005) Situational Analysis: Grounded Theory after the Postmodern Turn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412985833
Clarke AE & Star SL (2003) Science, Technology, and Medicine Studies. In Reynolds LT & Herman-Kinney NJ (eds) Handbook of Symbolic Interactionism. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, 539–574.
Clarke AE & Star SL (2008) The Social Worlds Framework: A Theory/Methods Package. In Hackett EJ, Amsterdamska O, Lynch M & Wajcman J (eds) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. 3rd ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 113–137.
Collins HM (2010) Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226113821.001.0001
Cooper MH (2009) Commercialization of the University and Problem Choice by Academic Biological Scientists. Science, Technology & Human Values 34(5): 629–653.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243908329379
Ein Kamerabild allein reicht nicht. (2011) News release. 2011. Available at: http://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/Artikel/2011/08/2011-08-15-ein-kamerabild-allein-reicht-nicht-aus.html (accessed 26.4.2013).
Etzkowitz H (2003) Research Groups as "Quasi-firms": The Invention of the Entrepreneurial University. Research Policy 32(1): 109–121.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00009-4
Etzkowitz H & Leydesdorff LA (2000) The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Research Policy 29(2): 109–123.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
Fujimura JH (1987) Constructing 'Do-able' Problems in Cancer Research: Articulation Alignment. Social Studies of Science 17(2): 257–293.
https://doi.org/10.1177/030631287017002003
Fujimura JH (1996) Crafting Science: A Sociohistory of the Quest for the Genetics of Cancer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674332874
Fuller S (2000) The Governance of Science: Ideology and the Future of the Open Society. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Garfinkel H (1967) Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.
Gerson EM (1983) Scientific Work and Social Worlds. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization 4(3): 357–377.
https://doi.org/10.1177/107554708300400302
Gibbons M, Limoges C, Nowotny H, Schwartzman S, Scott P & Trow M (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage.
Gieryn TF (1983) Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists. American Sociological Review 48(6): 781–795.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2095325
Gieryn TF (1995) Boundaries of Science. In Jasanoff S, Markle GE, Petersen JC & Pinch TJ (eds) Handbook of science and technology studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 393–443.
Gieryn TF (1999) Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Goldstein HA (2010) To What Extent is Academic Entrepreneurship Taken for Granted Within Research Universities? Higher Education Policy 23(1): 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1057/hep.2009.16
Guston DH (1999) Stabilizing the Boundary between US Politics and Science: The Role of the Office of Technology Transfer as a Boundary Organization. Social Studies of Science 29(1): 87–111.
https://doi.org/10.1177/030631299029001004
Guston DH (2001) Boundary Organizations in Environmental Policy and Science: An Introduction. Science, Technology & Human Values 26(4): 399–408.
https://doi.org/10.1177/016224390102600401
Hanseth O & Monteiro E (1997) Inscribing Behaviour in Information Infrastructure. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 7(4): 183–211.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-8022(97)00008-8
Holloway KJ (2015) Normalizing Complaint: Scientists and the Challenge of Commercialization. Science, Technology & Human Values 40(5): 744–765.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915576004
Jasanoff S (1990) The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Jerolmack C & Khan S (2014) Talk Is Cheap: Ethnography and the Attitudinal Fallacy. Sociological Methods & Research 43(2): 178–209.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124114523396
Jones MP (2009) Entrepreneurial Science: The Rules of the Game. Social Studies of Science 39(6): 821–851.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312709104434
Khan S & Jerolmack C (2013) Saying Meritocracy and Doing Privilege. The Sociological Quarterly 54(1): 9–19.
https://doi.org/10.1111/tsq.12008
Kleinman DL & Vallas SP (2001) Science, Capitalism, and the Rise of the "Knowledge Worker": The Changing Structure of Knowledge Production in the United States. Theory and Society 30(4): 451–492.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011815518959
Knorr Cetina K (1981) The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Kreckel R (ed) (2008) Zwischen Promotion und Professur: Das wissenschaftliche Personal in Deutschland im Vergleich mit Frankreich, Grossbritannien, USA, Schweden, den Niederlanden, Österreich und der Schweiz. Leipzig: Akademische Verlagsanstalt.
Lam A (2010) From 'Ivory Tower Traditionalists' to 'Entrepreneurial Scientists'? Academic Scientists in Fuzzy University-Industry Boundaries. Social Studies of Science 40(2): 307–340.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312709349963
Latour B (1993) We Have Never Been Modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lave R, Mirowski P & Randalls S (2010) "Introduction: STS and Neoliberal Science." Social Studies of Science 40(5): 659–675.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312710378549
Marcus GE (1995) Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology 24(1): 95–117.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.000523
Miller C (2001) Hybrid Management: Boundary Organizations, Science Policy, and Environmental Governance in the Climate Regime. Science, Technology & Human Values 26(4): 478–500.
https://doi.org/10.1177/016224390102600405
Möllers N (in press) Shifting In and Out of Context: Technoscientific Drama as Technology of the Self. Social Studies of Science.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312716638951
Nowotny H, Scott P & Gibbons M (2001) Re-thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Owen-Smith J & Powell WW (2002) Standing on Shifting Terrain: Faculty Responses to the Transformation of Knowledge and Its Uses in the Life Sciences. Science Studies 15(1): 3–28.
Parker J & Crona B (2012) On Being all Things to all People: Boundary Organizations and the Contemporary Research University. Social Studies of Science 42(2): 262–289.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312711435833
Slaughter S & Rhoades G (2004) Academic Capitalism and the New Economy: Markets, State, and Higher Education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Star SL & Griesemer JR (1989) Institutional Ecology, 'Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science 19(3): 387–420.
https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001
Star SL & Strauss AL (1999) Layers of Silence, Arenas of Voice: The Ecology of Visible and Invisible Work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 8(1-2): 9–30.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008651105359
Strauss AL (1991) A Social World Perspective. In Creating Sociological Awareness: Collective Images and Symbolic Representations, 233–44. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Strauss AL. & Corbin JM (2008) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tuunainen J (2005a) Contesting a Hybrid Firm at a Traditional University. Social Studies of Science 35(2): 173–210.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705047825
Tuunainen J (2005b) When Disciplinary Worlds Collide: The Organizational Ecology of Disciplines in a University Department. Symbolic Interaction 28(2): 205–228.
https://doi.org/10.1525/si.2005.28.2.205
Tuunainen J & Knuuttila, T (2009) Intermingling Academic and Business Activities: A New Direction for Science and Universities? Science, Technology & Human Values 34(6): 684–704.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243909337118
Vallas SP & Kleinman DL (2008) Contradiction, Convergence and the Knowledge economy: The Confluence of Academic and Commercial Biotechnology. Socio-Economic Review 6(2): 283–311.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwl035
Wehrens R, Bekker M & Bal R (2013) Hybrid Management Configurations in Joint Research. Science, Technology & Human Values 39(1): 6–41.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243913497807
Woolgar S (1991) Configuring the User: The Case of Usability Trials. In A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, edited by John Law, 57–99. London: Routledge.
Ziman J (2000) Real Science: What it Is and What it Means. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511541391
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Terms & Conditions
This Science & Technology Studies website ("Site") is owned and operated by The Finnish Society for Science and Technology Studies (“Society”). The Finnish Society for Science and Technology Studies and its publication Science & Technology Studies are non-profit organizations.
By accessing or using the Site, you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions below ("Terms and Conditions"). These Terms and Conditions incorporate by reference and include the Site's Privacy Policy and any guidelines, rules or disclaimers that may be posted and updated on specific web pages or on notices that are sent to you. If you do not agree with these Terms and Conditions, please do not use this Site.
The Society reserves the right to change, modify, add or remove portions of these Terms and Conditions at its discretion at any time and without prior notice. Please check this page periodically for any modifications. Your continued use of this Site following the posting of any changes will mean that you have accepted the changes.
Copyrights and Limitations on Use
Content on this website is protected by Creative Commons license CC BY 4.0. The copyright of articles remains with the authors but the license permits other users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the published articles. Using and sharing the content is permitted as long as original materials are appropriately credited. Metadata (e.g. the article title) is an exeption - this is licensed under CC0 that permits the distribution of the article information - not content - in archives and databases.
The Site may contain robot exclusion headers, and by using the Site you agree that you will not use any robots, spiders, crawlers or other automated downloading programs or devices to access, search, index, monitor or copy any Content. The harvesting of postal or email addresses from the Site for purposes of sending unsolicited or unauthorized commercial material, is prohibited.
You may not use the services on the Site to publish or distribute any information (including software or other content) that is illegal; violates or infringes upon the rights of any other person; is abusive, hateful, profane, pornographic, threatening or vulgar; contains errors, viruses or other harmful components; or is otherwise actionable by law. Science & Technology Studies may at any time exercise editorial control over the content of any information or material that is submitted or distributed through its facilities and/or services.
You may not, without the approval of Science & Technology Studies, use the Site to publish or distribute any advertising, promotional material, or solicitation to other users of the Site to use any goods or services. For example (but without limitation), you may not use the Site to conduct any business, to solicit the performance of any activity that is prohibited by law, or to solicit other users to become subscribers of other information services. Similarly, you may not use the Site to download and redistribute public information or shareware for personal gain or use the facilities and/or services to distribute multiple copies of public domain information or shareware.
Trademarks
All trademarks appearing on this Site are the property of their respective owners.
Links to Other Sites
The Site may contain hyperlinks to other sites or resources that are provided solely for your convenience. Science & Technology Studies is not responsible for the availability of external sites or resources linked to the Site, and does not endorse and is not responsible or liable for any content, advertising, products or other materials on or available from such sites or resources. Transactions that occur between you and any third party are strictly between you and the third party and are not the responsibility of Science & Technology Studies. Due to the fact that Science & Technology Studies is not responsible for the availability or accuracy of these outside resources or their contents, you should review the terms and conditions and privacy policies of these linked sites, as their policies may differ from ours.
Last revised: 3 Aug 2020
