On making infrastructure visible: putting the non-humans to rights

Trevor Pinch

Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2010, vol. 34, issue 1, 77-89

Abstract: Using the author's own experiences in local politics, the paper examines several cases in which pieces of mundane infrastructure are contested. The cases include eruvs, traffic-calming technologies, and invisible dog fences. The argument is that in contra distinction to abstract philosophical approaches to technology, the social construction of technology (SCOT) needs to return to the examination of the mundane embeddedness of technologies in everyday life. It is argued that an adequate approach to the role of the human and the non-human should not buy into a distinction between ontology and epistemology but instead should focus upon the contested interaction of humans and non-humans in everyday life and thereby restore the analysis of intentionality and meaning to its rightful place at the core of the sociology of technology. Copyright The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved., Oxford University Press.

Date: 2010
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bep044 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:cambje:v:34:y:2010:i:1:p:77-89

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

Cambridge Journal of Economics is currently edited by Jacqui Lagrue

More articles in Cambridge Journal of Economics from Cambridge Political Economy Society Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().