[en] This article explores the merits of foregrounding
the dichotomy of politicization vs de-politicization for our
understanding of bio-objects in order to study their production,
circulation, and governance in European societies.
By asking how bio-objects are configured in science, policy,
public, and media discourses and practices, we focus
on the role of socio-technical configurations in generating
political relations. The bio-object thereby serves as an entry
point to approach and conceptualize “the political” in
an innovative way.
Drawing from our previous work, which uses the concepts
of de-politicization and (re-)politicization, this paper puts
forward a research agenda for studying the political relations
generated by specific socio-technical configurations of bio-objects.
Disciplines :
Communication & mass media Anthropology Political science, public administration & international relations
Author, co-author :
Maeseele, Pieter; Universiteit Antwerpen - UA
Hendrickx, Kim ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de science politique > Gouvernance et société
Pavone, Vincenzo; 3Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas
Van Hoyweghen, Ine; Katholieke Universiteit Leuven - KUL
Language :
English
Title :
Bio-Objects' Political Capacity: A Research Agenda
Publication date :
April 2013
Journal title :
Croatian Medical Journal
ISSN :
0353-9504
eISSN :
1332-8166
Publisher :
Medicinska Naklada, Zagreb, Croatia
Volume :
54
Pages :
206-211
Peer reviewed :
Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi
Name of the research project :
ISCH COST Action IS1001: Bio-objects and their boundaries: governing matters at the intersection of society, politics and science,
Beck U. the risk society: toíards a neí modernity. Thousand Oaks (CA ): Sage Publications; 1992.
Fukuyama F. The end of history and the last man. Neí York (NY ): Avon Books; 1992.
Giddens A. Beyond left and right: The future of radical politics. Cambridge (UK): Polity; 1994.
Butler J. Competing universalities. In: Butler J, Laclau E, Zizek S. Contingency, hegemony, universality. contemporary dialogues of the left. Neí York (NY ): Verso; 2000: p. 136-81.
Mouffe C. On the political. London: Routledge; 2005.
Rancicre J. La chair des mots: Politiques de l'écriture. Galilée ISBN 9782718604992; 1998.
žižek S. The ticklish subject: the absent centre of political ontology. Neí York (NY ): Verso; 1999.
Maeseele P. Science journalism and social debate on modernization risks. Journal of Science Communication. 2010b;9:C02.
Tsouvalis J, Íateron C. Connected communities: public participation as a process of de-politicization. Lancaster (UK): Centre for the Study of Environmental Change (CSEC), Lancaster University; 2012.
Maeseele P. On neo-luddites led by ayatollahs. The frame matrix of the GM food debate in Northern Belgium. Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and Culture. 2010a;4:277-300.
Maeseele P. On neís media and democratic debate: framing agricultural biotechnology in Northern Belgium. The International Communication Gazette. 2011;73:83-105. doi:10.1177/1748048510386743
Pavone V, Goven J, Guarino R. From risk assessment to incontext trajectory evaluation-GMOs and their social implications. Environmental Sciences Europe. 2011;23:3-13. doi:10.1186/2190- 4715-23-3
Pavone V. Science, neoliberalism and bioeconomy [in Spanish]. Revista Iberoamericana de Cienca. Tecnologia y Sociedad. 2012;7:145-61.
Birch K. The neoliberal underpinnings of the bioeconomy: the ideological discourses and practices of economic competitiveness. Genomics. Soc Policy. 2006;2:1-15.
Barry A. Political machines: governing a technological society. London: Athlone Press;2001.
Callon M, Lascoumes P, Barthe Y. Acting in an uncertain íorld: an essay on technical democracy [in French]. Paris: Le Seuil; 2001.
Jasanoff S. The fifth branch: science advisors as policymakers. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press; 1990.
Poíer M. Organized uncertainty: designing a íorld of risk management. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press; 2007.
Van Hoyíeghen I, Horstman K. Evidence-based underíriting in the molecular age. The politics of reinsurance companies toíards the genetics issue. N Genet Soc. 2009;28:317-37. doi:10.1080/14636770903314483
Barry A. The anti-political economy. Econ Soc. 2002;31:268-84. doi:10.1080/03085140220123162
Mouffe C. The Democratic Paradox. Neí York: Verso; 2000.
Demortain D. Standards of scientific advice. Risk analysis and the formation of the European Food Safety Authority. In: Lentsch J, Íeingart P, eds. Scientific advice to policy making: international comparison. Leverkusen (Germany): Barbara Budrich Publishers; 2009: p. 141-60.
Hendrickx K, Penders B. Food safety body is bound to draí fire. Nature. 2012;485:582. Medline:22660308 doi:10.1038/485582d
De Vries G. Íhat is political in sub-politics? Hoí Aristotle might help STS. Soc Stud Sci. 2007;37:781-809. doi:10.1177/0306312706070749
Latour B. Turning around politics: a note on Gerard De Vries's paper. Soc Stud Sci. 2007;37:811-20. doi:10.1177/0306312707081222
Lemke T, Moore L, Casper M. Biopolitics: an advanced introduction. Neí York (NY ): Neí York University Press; 2010.
Miller P, Rose N. Governing the present: administering economic, social and personal life. Cambridge (UK): Polity Press; 2008.
Boden R, Epstein D, Latimar J. Accounting for ethos or programmes for conduct? The brave neí íorld of research ethics committees. Sociol Rev. 2009;57:727-49. doi:10.1111/j.1467-954X.2009.01869.x
Sunder Rajan K. Biocapital: The constitution of postgenomic life. Durham (NC): Duke University Press; 2006.
Palsson G. Biosocial relations of production. Comp Stud Soc Hist. 2009;51:288-313. doi:10.1017/S0010417509000139
Gille Z. Actor netíorks, modes of production and íaste regimes: reassembling the macrosocial. Environ Plan A. 2010;42:1049-64. doi:10.1068/a42122
Caliskan K, Callon M. Economization part 2: a research programme for the study of markets. Econ Soc. 2010;39:1-32. doi:10.1080/03085140903424519
Pottage A. Our original inheritance. In: Pottage A, Mundy M, eds. Kinship, laí and the unexpected: relatives are alíays a surprise. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press; 2005. p. 249-85.
Strathern M.Kinship, laí and the unexpected: relatives are alíays a surprise,Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press,2006
Van Hoyíeghen I. Taming the íild life of genes by laí. Genes reconfiguring solidarity in insurance. N Genet Soc. 2010;29:431-55. doi:10.1080/14636778.2010.528190
