1

Meltdown: Why ANT?

John Law

Centre for Science StudiesLancaster University

2

A journey?

1. Sociology of science• Merton• Scientific method• Scientific content to be protected by the

Cudos norms• Communism• Universalism• Disinterestedness• Scepticism

• A sociology of scientific institutions: not scientific content

3

A journey?

2. The Kuhnian revolution• Paradigms• Puzzle solving (active agency!)• Pragmatism (tool)• Practice• Vision/seeing• Community based – and training

4

A journey?

3. Sociology of Scientific Knowledge• Paradigm is a shared culture!• Used by scientists• Solving problems generated by

• Paradigm itself• Social Interests

• Ie: a form of the sociology of knowledge• Society > shapes culture/knowledge/science

5

A journey?

4. Material Semiotics• Relationality• Process• Heterogeneous practice• Everything an effect• Potentially revisable

Collision

6

Practice?

Analytical term

Practice - in Practice!!

7

Welfare Quality®: outline

• EU FP 6 Project; 2004-2009; €17m

• Farm animal Welfare• Standards/labelling• Animal Science and

Social Science

8

Policy practice?

Animal science views

Industry stakeholders’

views

Policy Recommendations

9

Enacting the public in policy practice?

Public views of animal welfare

Animal science views

Industry stakeholders’

views

Policy Recommendations

10

The public multiple

There are several different practices

So we get the public multiple!

11

Practising three publics?

1. Survey Public2. Focus Group public3. ‘PowerPoint public’

12

WQ: versions of the public

Animal science views

Industry stakeholders’

views

Policy Recommendations

Public 1:‘Survey public’

Public 2: ‘Focus group public’

Public 3: ‘Power-point

publics’

13

The basic question

How are they done in practice?

A study in (social science) practice!

14

1. Survey Public

15

Survey practice

• process; assemblage• heterogeneous• set of relations• Done, enacted, in time

16

Survey Results?

• Collectivity?• The world =

statistical collection

17

The survey public enacted

• % thinking of animal welfare ‘in general’ and ‘when buying’, 7 countries;

• High level of interest; quite high ‘when buying’

18

Doing the survey person … in practice

Survey: enacts persons: • self-quantifying individuals• containers of somewhat stable attitudes

19

The survey public

• What goes into this? - process; assemblage, practices, effort, time

• What does it enact?- specific claims- person as container of (welfare-concerned) attitudes- collectivity / public as quantified aggregate

• What comes out and circulates?- statistical summary

• Concealed?- the practices of production- specificity/arbitrariness of person/collectivity

20

Survey public in political practice

Industry: public has an unrealistic/idealistic view; and

won’t pay anyway!

Public views of animal welfare: important, needs

information

Political positionin relation to

industry stakeholders

21

2. Focus Group Public

22

• Betteralternative?

• Morerealistic? / politicallysubtle?

The Focus Group?

23

Focus Group practice• Enacts

person as storyteller

• Circulation? Stories!

• Collectiveas story/ position ….?

Focus group public enacted1. Animal itself and its environment

2. Naturalistic– Environment (green fields); outdoor living;

natural behaviours; being ‘fit for their environments’

3. Holistic– Can’t be broken down

4. Inseparable from other issues– Sustainability, quality, taste, human health,

GMOs

25

Focus Group Public

• What goes into this?– A process, assemblage, practices

• What does it enact?– Specific claims– Person as a story-teller– Collectivity as typical/illustrative stories

• What comes out and circulates?– Stories and views about welfare

• Concealed?– the practices of production– specificity/arbitrariness of person/collectivity

26

Focus group public in political practice

Animal science views: more atomistic, less naturalistic

Public views of animal welfare: holistic/naturalistic stories

Political positionin relation to

animal science

27

3. PowerPoint Public

28

• Berlin, May 2007

29

Enacting the PowerPoint public• Locating/enacting the public as an actor in a

network/system• Hetero-

geneous• Reciprocal

relations

• Publicversionno. 3?

30

Meeting politics• PowerPoint:

fromstakeholders’meeting!

• Political again• In relation to

(some) angrystakeholders…‘consumers naive,and cost-conscious’

31

Enacting performative publics

Animal science views

Industry stakeholders’

views

Policy Recommendations

Public 2: ‘Focus group public’

Public 3:PowerPoint

Public 1:‘Survey public’

32

Concluding …

33

Practices … in practice!

34

STS

• Not just about science and technology (spatiality, organisation, health care, education, psychology, politics, embodiment ….)

• A set of techniques (sensibility?)

• ANT (material semiotics) attends to practices

35

Attention to Practices

• Analytical unit• Detectable patterning/strategy• Of heterogeneous materials/relations• That enacts reals (and representations)• At particular locations/sites• That may or may not hold• and may or may not be

circulable/translatable to other sites

36

Abandoning Sociological Assumptions?

• A somewhat stable social• Explaining particular phenomena

Or?

• Practices assembling/enacting realities (social/material)

• Seeing what holds as these realities circulate

37

Sociology and STS: relations

• Slow sociology (the how problem)

• Relational enactment, not predictable structuring

• No outside view

• Final thought: the case study (theory in practice)