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
- Convenor:
-
Jessica Mesman
(Maastricht University)
Send message to Convenor
- Chair:
-
Willemine Willems
(VU)
- Format:
- Traditional Open Panel
- Location:
- NU-5A47
- Sessions:
- Tuesday 16 July, -
Time zone: Europe/Amsterdam
Short Abstract:
In this panel we explore methodological questions around identifying and explicating how professionals and others accomplish to navigate complex situations. We welcome contributions that address diverse approaches that aim to bring these implicit and often invisible strength of practices into view.
Long Abstract:
There is a rich tradition in the field of Science and Technology Studies that revolves around the close – often ethnographic – study of complex and diverse practices. Closely studying how in practice rail- and waterways are maintained and governed, how patient-doctor interactions unfold in the consultation room, and how in conservation practices challenging decision-making is tackled, we have gained in-depth and often surprising understanding of how various professionals and others navigate tensions and conflicts. These types of studies have shown for example that routines and interactions are imbued with moral or evaluation repertoires, and that ontologies are multiple. The common denominator in these studies is a concern with how collaboration is accomplished amidst a plurality of perspectives, knowledges, priorities and /or moralities. In this regard, they are distinct from evaluation methods commonly used in organizations that typically focus on either the outcomes of processes or on failures and breakdowns. “Exnovation”, or “innovation from within” directs our attention to highlighting and harnessing the ecological power of existing practices – in situ, and in action. Methodologically, by creating spaces for transformative learning through dialogic reflective practices, research can allow the hidden strengths of existing practices to be illuminated, learned, and strengthened collectively, increasing the potential for practice optimization and academic comprehension.
Many STS researchers focus on the invisible and implicit strength of current practices in-action. We welcome papers about studies that have such a focus, regardless of whether the term exnovation is used. The focus of the panel is methodological: how to identify and explicate ‘forgotten’ competencies and resources protect what works well and to further improve practice at hand? What technical or theoretical devices enable scholarly and professional participants to see, understand, and reflect anew upon the informal logics of how they work?
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Tuesday 16 July, 2024, -Paper short abstract:
In this paper we present a practice-oriented evaluation framework, distinguishing four transformative capacities. This framework invites policy makers to reflect on the transformative potential of their practices in the context of a reflexive evaluation of Dutch national climate policy.
Paper long abstract:
Prevailing policies and governance in the Netherlands are directed at ‘greening’ existing practices, however, to achieve true sustainability, a deeper "system transformation" is needed, involving a re-evaluation of production and consumption patterns (de Coninck, 2022). However, progress towards a climate-neutral society by 2050 is hindered as current climate policies are fragmented across ministries, and there is an inherent risk that civil servants, whose practices are inextricably intertwined with the status quo, will inadvertently reproduce the system preventing reaching the 2050 goal. Recognizing this risk, it is proposed that a "double transformation" is required of both society and government, urging a comprehensive reassessment of policies, institutional structures, cultural values, and narratives both inside and outside government for lasting change.
In this paper we present a practice-oriented evaluation framework for government transformative capacities. The framework follows a practice-oriented approach, as practice theory acknowledges both institutional conditions in which participants operate as well as their agency to reform these conditions (Shove, 2010). The assessment framework suggests that for the government to effectively initiate and support transformative change, it should demonstrate four essential capacities: orchestrating-, adaptive-, system-innovating- and legitimizing capacity, translated to desired practices through associated actions and institutional conditions. In three inter ministerial case studies within climate policy, policy makers from four different ministries are invited to reflect on the transformative potential of their practices. This scholarly pursuit thus aims to achieve societal transformation from within the 'heart of the regime', by supporting exnovation of anti-transformative practices.
Paper short abstract:
Drawing on an ethnographic study in two hospitals, we show that obstetricians and midwives detach from episiotomy, a controversial procedure, through a dynamic process of redefining its benefits/risks, promoting new or forgotten skills and managing professional tensions & organizational constraints.
Paper long abstract:
Episiotomy is a surgical procedure performed during childbirth to accelerate birth and/or prevent serious perineal tearing. It became routine, reaching a peak of 58.4% in 1996, before its effectiveness was questioned by an emerging patient movement, which prompted scientific authorities to publish guidelines (in 2005). Since, the national rate declined steadily, reaching an historical low of 8.3% in 2021. Recently, episiotomy entered the public debate as a new form of violence against women, known as "obstetric and gynaecological violence".
Drawing on new perspectives from the sociology of innovation looking into calls to 'do without' practices deemed problematic (Goulet & Vinck, 2023), we aim to analyze how obstetricians and midwives manage to reduce their use of episiotomy, in line with feminist demands. We conducted an ethnographic study (over 200 hours observations and 35 interviews) in two French maternity settings. In hospital A, a pioneer in criticising the (over)medicalisation of childbirth, midwives detached from episiotomy, in part transferring it to obstetricians. At the same time, they positioned themselves as key agents in helping obstetricians to reduce their recourse to episiotomy, by emphasising their skills in managing childbirth. This contrast with hospital B where episiotomy regulation was a top-down process decided by obstetricians aiming to implement a less interventionist approach of childbirth while keeping on performing over 5000 births/year. Our findings demonstrate that detachment from episiotomy isn’t achieved by returning to a previous state, but by a dynamic process of redefining its benefits/risks, visibilising new and forgotten know-hows, managing professional tensions and organizational.
Paper short abstract:
Danger and safety are not opposed in Dutch firefighting – they have to do with one another in more complex ways. Importing outside logics when attending to this practice obscures these vital nuances; a good intervention in this practice requires tinkering with both, and their relation in practice.
Paper long abstract:
To describe what is at stake in Dutch firefighting, the terms ‘gevaarlijk’ (‘dangerous’) and ‘veilig’ (safe) are useful. But entering the field assuming these two terms are opposite ends in a single register – as is commonly done – belies and obscures their relation in practice. We argue that much can be learned about a practice when semantic relations aren’t given. As firefighters perform ‘veiligheid’ not as the property of a situation but rather as a constant task, danger and safety emerge tightly together; one begets the other and makes it necessary. ‘Gevaar’ needs to be performed so firefighters can be ‘veilig’: most accidents occur in situations where there is little danger. This link, however, must be performed well: in the face of mounting danger, safety practice can still fail, as in the case of a firefighter who feels unsafe with her current team, and fears things may go wrong when danger looms. Meanwhile, which ‘gevaar’ is mounting is not trivial: shifting measurements mean shifting dangers; as ‘danger’ morphs, so does the protocol for ‘safety’. Sounds complex? That is because this case stretches what is possible to articulate in the common logics or tropes to describe ‘danger’ and ‘safety’ through. Latest changes to firefighting practice do not result in either ‘more’ or ‘less safety’, as outside logics may imply. A good improvement of firefighting means tinkering and playing with the relation between danger and safety that is at play within. So go the blazing-hot complexities of relating terms in practice.