Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Dan Santos
(Australian National University)
Angus Dowell (The University of Auckland)
Send message to Convenors
- Format:
- Traditional Open Panel
Short Abstract:
This panel invites research that examines processes of economization and marketization with respect to emerging technologies. Papers will explore how these technologies are framed and valued, how economic forms are being (re)configured, in relation to non-economic factors and in different contexts.
Long Abstract:
We are in the midst of a period of rapid technological development. There are now emerging technologies in multiple domains, including digital technologies (e.g. cloud computing, artificial intelligence) and biotechnologies (e.g. synthetic biology, CRISPR-based genetic engineering). These technologies present issues about how they should be effectively and equitably governed. Here, economic factors and forms are critical to consider, as these shape dynamics around innovation, distribution, and access to these technologies. This foregrounds the importance of analyzing processes of economization, and often, marketization (Çalışkan and Callon 2010; Callon 2021), including how these technologies are developed, valued, and configured in relation to particular economic forms (e.g. markets).
This open panel invites research that explores and examines processes of economization and marketization with respect to emerging technologies. We are interested in papers that consider :
- What techno-economic assumptions inform the development of these technologies (Birch 2017)? How are dimensions of emerging technologies framed and valu(at)ed as ‘economic’?
- How are existing economic forms/orders being reconfigured through these technologies, and what new economic forms/orders are being developed and experimented with (e.g. Asdal and Cointe 2021)?
- How are boundaries being drawn between the economic and other orders (social, political, legal, ethical), and how are these boundaries being consolidated and/or contested by various social actors and groups (e.g. through standards, rules, regulations)?
- How do these processes and dynamics vary across different contexts and in different places (e.g. Berndt and Boeckler 2011; Berndt, Peck, and Rantisi 2020)?
Overall, we are interested in developing a comparative and critical picture of emerging technologies and processes of economization/marketization, in order to interrogate the economic conditions, practices and devices that shape their emergence and imagine more desirable economic configurations, trajectories and futures for these emerging technologies.
Accepted papers:
Session 1Rajender Singh (Western University)
Short abstract:
This paper analyzes the role of education influencers as emerging experts facilitating market-making in education for platform companies. Specifically, it analyzes the role of their two market devices - 'how-to' YouTube videos and expertise enactment - in shaping the education technology market.
Long abstract:
Platformization of education has accelerated in the past decade with major Big Tech companies such as Google, Microsoft, and Amazon assuming key roles in educational processes. This paper employs a market-making lens to illustrate how Google's deepening presence in education is mediated through the configuration of a new category of experts in education, namely education influencers. Drawing on Callon’s marketization framework (Çalışkan and Callon 2010; Callon 2021), I present a multi-sited netnographic analysis of the digital traces of two prominent education influencers. The empirical analysis elucidates how these influencers create a market for technology companies in education by mobilizing two main market devices: "how-to" YouTube videos, and the enactment of their expertise. The investigation reveals that ‘how-to’ YouTube videos engage in three different levels of framing: firstly, detaching Google products from their corporate identity; secondly, re-entangling these products with educators working in varying institutional contexts; thirdly, attaching these products to other third-party applications commonly used in schools. Furthermore, the analysis shows how the enactment of expertise not only solidifies the expert status of the influencers but also introduces and popularizes new values in education, particularly in the form of a specific kind of platform labor for educators that further entangles their professional practice with the digital products. Finally, the analysis underscores how these framings and devices of education influencers co-constitute the users (students and educators) in relation to Google products by positioning these tools as the de facto solution for educational needs.
Maria Amelia Rodriguez (University of Queensland)
Short abstract:
This study highlights the productivity of biological samples within the scientific capital market, demonstrating their importance beyond the traditional economic market in biomedicine.
Long abstract:
This investigation delves into the scientific capital market, underscoring the alternative productivity that biological samples bring to the realm of scientific research. Far from being just subjects of economic exchange, these samples are crucial for propelling scientific knowledge, credibility, and innovation forward. The Tumour Bank at the National Institute of Oncology in Mexico exemplifies their role in scientific practices, where biological samples are treated not as commodities, but as foundational elements for the market of scientific capital.
In this landscape, biological samples emerge as key drivers for a range of products that are essential to the accumulation of scientific capital. The competitive dynamics surrounding access to and governance over these samples highlight the market's nuanced nature, where scientific capital, represented by peer recognition, research funding, and publication metrics, becomes the primary currency fuelling scientific endeavours.
This study delves into the economic, intellectual, and societal impacts of biological samples within the scientific capital market, highlighting the necessity of recognizing the existence and significance of this market. It argues for the acknowledgment of factors beyond the conventional economic market in discussions surrounding biomedicine, aiming to broaden the perspective on what drives scientific innovation and contributes to societal advancement.
Nicolás Sollazzo (University of Amsterdam)
Short abstract:
Utilizing the findings of a multi-sited ethnography on Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs), their collectors, and their creators, this presentation aims to highlight the potential of understanding ownership as part of processes of economization.
Long abstract:
How is ownership done? I explore this question through the peculiar case of Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs), a blockchain asset that collectors, artists and creators use to economize digital objects such as digital works of art. Before their inception, these digital objects presented difficulties to be both traded and owned due to their almost limitless reproducibility. NFTs, posed by many as a solution to this conundrum, act as a prosthesis to these files by playing the role of a unique digital certificate of ownership to the holder. Through a multi-sited ethnography carried out in both offline and online settings, I trace NFTs and the actors entangled with them.
Debates on ownership across the social sciences have historically taken the notion of property as a ‘bundle of rights’ as a parting point. (Boydell & Searle, 2014; Carruthers & Ariovich, 2004; Davies, 2012; C. Hann, 2005, 2006) Here instead, my focus is to treat ownership as an empirical question (Strang & Busse, 2011b; Strathern, 1999, 2001; Verran, 1998), something that is accomplished in practice and which takes shape within a socio-technical agéncement (Birch & Muniesa, 2020; Caliskan, 2007; Callon & Muniesa, 2005; Knorr Cetina & Bruegger, 2002a; Poon, 2007; Preda, 2006). I trace how actors coalesced to enact ownership and – with it – economized digital objects. Through this approach, I aim to highlight the potential of understanding ownership as part of processes of economization.
Laura Bruschi (University of Milan)
Short abstract:
Grounded in a 7-month-long ethnographic study, this paper explores the functioning of a marketing infrastructure that collects and analyzes consumer data using AI. Using 'sustainability' as an example, it focuses on the actors, practices and values contributing to the creation of marketing insights
Long abstract:
The proliferation of data and digital traces led to an increased interest in the capacity to analyse heterogeneous data (Amoore & Piotukh, 2016). While this is true for a vast range of fields, marketing practices offer a compelling example for investigating how consumers’ data is captured, stored, analysed, and sold.
Accordingly, this paper draws on a 7-month-long ethnographic study conducted within a digital marketing agency that specialises in collecting consumer data from social media platforms and that utilises artificial intelligence for analysis. AI is extensively used in various facets of the company, covering everything from data collection and analysis to the publication of results on a platform accessible only to employees and paying consumers. Furthermore, to gain a deeper understanding of the data used by the agency, the researcher also had access to data containing the keyword “sustainability”, chosen in accordance with the company as representative of one of the biggest areas of interest for their clients. The analysis of the data, containing both images and text, allowed for a reflection on the data and users involved in the creation of marketing insights. Results show that the community used by the marketing agency is formed of users holding a privileged point of view (ex. content creators). Moreover, this composition contributes to the creation of biased marketing insights, notably evidenced by the absence of key sustainability-related concepts.
Grounded in sociological and STS literature, this research seeks to explore the socio-technical aspects essential for the functioning of a marketing infrastructure.
Kobe De Keere (University of Amsterdam)
Short abstract:
This paper explores the cultural architecture underlying the cryptocurrency market through ethnographic participation in market events and in-depth interviews with market actors (N: 70) in the Netherlands, the UK, and Russia.
Long abstract:
With approximately half a billion cryptocurrency users worldwide, the crypto market is one of the most rapidly emerging markets in modern history. The decentralized and transparent aspects of cryptocurrency are hailed by some as a way to economically level an unequal playing field, while others depict it as a new fertile breeding ground for online scams. Yet, early evidence suggests that there is much more to cryptocurrency than merely a technological innovation or cynical profit-making, but that a complex web of political, cultural, and social dynamics is behind the emergence of the crypto field.
This paper presents a country comparative field analysis that aims to map out the moral and cultural architecture that underlies the different positions in the crypto market by exploring the question: why do people buy into crypto? Based on in-depth interviews (N:70) with different market actors (ranging from cyberpunks to day traders) in the Netherlands, the UK, and Russia, and ethnographic participation in Meet Ups, hackathons, industry events, and conferences in the Netherlands and the UK, this study uncovers two principal structuring dimensions within the market.
One dimension involves positioning on the question of whether crypto is a new type of money (digital metallism) or to be understood as simply a smart, profitable, and lucrative type of investment. The second dimension revolves around actors’ commitment to the original values such as sovereignty, privacy, open source, and decentralization (infrastructural mutualism) versus those who support more regulation, centralization, and integration of crypto into traditional economic institutions.