Critique as a practice: inquiring into "virtual fence" and the politics of embeddedness (submitted 2019)

in Social Studies of Science (2020)

L’embarquement par son objet : trois politiques de l’enquête sur les clôtures virtuelles (virtual fence)

in Revue d'Anthropologie des Connaissances (2019)

Pratiques de l'enquête

Book published by Presses Universitaires de Liège (2019)

L’utopie faite chair: à propos de la sélection résiliente des bovins

in Rafanell i Orra, Josep (Ed.) Itinérances (2018)

The case for animal genomics and the prospects for modeling bovines in a bio economy

Conference (2017, August)

Governing anticipation through flexibility: the use of models for the regulation of chemicals

Scientific conference (2017, June 19)

Le calcul de la vache optimale: pratiques génomiques dans un centre de recherche biomédicale

Conference (2017, March 06)

Du bon usage des faits en régime de " post­-vérité"

Article for general public (2017)

Drawing technical contrasts to address prenatal testing

Conference (2016, December 07)

What can a diagnosis do? The case of the "genetization" of autism

Conference (2016, November 25)

The loose condition of "autism" is undergoing through a broad process of (re)definition under the aegis of genomic medicine, which promises to find (epi)genetic causes to autism, or at least to some forms of the Autism Spectrum Disorder. What is at stake is a scientific controversy about the very definition of the condition, i.e. the diagnosis itself. Whether it is considered primarily as a psychopathology or as a genetic disorder has consequences. It has implications regarding who would have the authority to diagnose the condition but also about the ways of taking care of persons with autism. In this paper, we depart from the paradox that some patients' organizations claim for a "geneticization" of the condition, so as to get rid of any sort of "psy-" related dimensions. It seems paradoxical because if the causes of autism are to be found in the genes, and hereby partly determined, it would seem to imply that the margins for effective therapy are narrowing down. We want to test the hypothesis that the more objective, "naturalized" a diagnosis is, the more it opens up possibilities for broadening the therapeutic reach outside the autist bodies, questioning the "milieu" of the disorder — the environment through which it is produced and the wealth of linkages and relationships through which living with autism could be eased. In other words, stressing that the diagnosis is a site to explore these contested dimensions of autism, its "geneticization" could lead to more active uptakes in patients care, whereas blurry diagnosis could not afford a similar reach. Following a pragmatic stance of an "art of consequences" (I. Stengers), we investigate the tensions raised by a genetic diagnosis which tends to "objectify" or "naturalize" the causes of the condition with respect to the lived experiences of persones with autism and their relatives, following some of the contested dimensions of a "politics of diagnosis" in their effects on affected autistic bodies and minds. To unfold those issues, our ongoing inquiry considers the interactions between various persons and institutions involved in the debate in Belgium.

The politics of “grayboxing”: The use of QSAR models for the flexible regulation of chemicals

Conference (2016, May 12)

‘A mechanistic interpretation, if possible’: How does predictive modelling causality affect the regulation of chemicals?

in Big Data and Society (2016), July-December(1), 1-11

The regulation of chemicals is undergoing drastic changes with the use of computational models to predict environmental toxicity. This particular issue has not attracted much attention, despite its major impacts on the regulation of chemicals. This raises the problem of causality at the crossroads between data and regulatory sciences, particularly in the case models known as quantitative structure–activity relationship models. This paper shows that models establish correlations and not scientific facts, and it engages anew the way regulators deal with uncertainties. It does so by exploring the tension and problems raised by the possibility of causal explanation afforded by quantitative structure–activity relationship models. It argues that the specificity of predictive modelling promotes rethinking of the regulation of chemicals.

Governing anticipation through flexibility. The use of models for the regulation of chemicals

Conference (2015, November 18)

As the use of models is increasing within regulatory bodies, it is important to grasp both the empirical practices of producing and using them, and their political meaning. At stake here is the possibility of identifying the characteristics of a way of governing anticipations that would be based on models. In this paper, we engage in such an exploration by focusing on models developed to predict the potential risks of chemicals. These models, called “Quantitative Structure-Activities Relationship” (QSAR), are based on statistical correlations between a set of descriptors (e.g. chemical composition, crystalline structures…) and a set of physicochemical properties, including potential toxicity. They are developed using a limited number of substances that serve as reference points, so that the properties of other chemicals could later be predicted by the model, according to their proximities to the reference points. QSAR models have been promoted by regulatory agencies for over twenty years, but have been recently gaining momentum in Europe, in the wake of the REACH regulation. As the regulation on chemicals is becoming more constraining on private companies, usual experimental approaches raise many concerns (which are lengthy, costly and often requires animal testing). Based on the analysis of the relevant documentation, interviews with scientists and regulators, as well as the ethnographic observation of a recent research project attempting to developed QSAR models for nanomaterials, this paper provides the preliminary elements for describing the mode of governing anticipation that emerges from the use of such models. We contend that QSAR approaches offer empirical examples to identify a mode of governing anticipation based on flexibility, understood at the epistemic and political levels.

Les exigences de la « terrestrialité »: une épreuve pour l’enquête

Conference (2015, October 27)

La preuve par le mashup: D. J. Haraway et les deux cultures de la modernisation réflexive

Conference (2015, June 08)

Un problème de constitution – faire exister des catégories réglementaires pour les objets techniques

Conference (2014, December 05)

Les datacenters, métaphore du capitalisme

Article for general public (2014)

Where is the Conflict? Delving in Walloon Science, Technology and Innovation Politics

Conference (2013, October)

Building on preliminary empirical observations, this paper seeks to analyze a specific feature of science, technology and innovation (STI) policies in Wallonia (Belgium); that is, the apparent lack of contestation regarding policy making. Over the last decade, multiple programs and plans were implemented by the regional government. These reforms of STI policy are endorsed by multiple stakeholders, including parliamentary opposition, labor unions and employers’ organizations. Seemingly, Walloon STI policies do not configure as conflict zones. This is remarkable since these programs and plans reconfigure the relationship between science, technological innovation and the market. In other policy fields, opposition is more pronounced and protracted. In other places/times, STI policy is/has been a conflicting matter. This is all the more striking in a context of strategic science advent, where STI is placed at the heart of large regional policy project, building strong ties with economic development and regional identity shaping. Can STS provide the tools and vocabulary to analyze non-conflictual, « cold » situations such as current STI policies and their evolution in Wallonia? Building on semi-structured interviews with key informants, our analysis will pay attention to Walloon contextual specificities as well as macro-level considerations: can dominant, taken-for-granted master narratives such as “knowledge-based economy”, “Regional innovation systems”, or, more recently, “open and responsible innovation” account for the relative smoothness of STI policies? We conclude that there is a felt need for empirical insights to analyze how these master narratives are locally enacted.

À propos du "trouble à l'ordre public": Dewey selon Stengers

Conference (2013, June 21)

Embarquement immédiat pour les nanotechnologies responsables. Comment poser et re-poser la question de la réflexivité?

Doctoral thesis (2013)

La lasagne pur-sang et la société low-cost

Article for general public (2013)

Pour satisfaire des consommateurs en quête de toujours plus de pouvoir d’achat, la Commission européenne soutient des gros producteurs low-cost pour une nourriture low-cost (avec des contrôles limités). Stop! Et vive l’agriculture locale.

Les Jourdain de la réflexivité : Du bon usage des incidents diplomatiques

E-print/Working paper (2012)

Cultiver d’autres expertises sur les sciences et les technologies

in Revue Nouvelle (2012), 10

Little by Little. Expansions of Nanoscience and Emerging Technologies

Book published by IOS Press (2012)

Little by little, nanotechnology has emerged amid enormous anticipations and fantastic promises of new materials, aspiring to manipulate our world “atom by atom.” While these grand visions continue to capture the imaginations of various audiences—and continue to be contested, as well—nanotechnology has developed into more than that. During the last two decades, many research programs and industrial R&D expenditures have resulted in actual products and tangible innovations. Nanotechnology, it seems, is expanding. But what does it mean to say that nanotechnology is expanding?

Elements for a diplomatic approach of ‘responsible innovation’ in nanotechnologies

Conference (2012, July 03)

Beyond the 'Charmed Circle' of OECD: New Directions for Studies of National Innovation Systems

Conference (2012, May 24)

Action publique et responsabilité gouvernementale : la gestion de la grippe A(H1N1) en 2009

in Courrier Hebdomadaire du CRISP (2012), 2138-2139

Have STS Fallen Into a Political Void? Depoliticisation and Engagement in the Case of Nanotechnologies

in Política e Sociedade (2012), 11(20), 205-226

In this paper we trace some of the key points in the history of Science and Technology Studies (STS). In particular we outline the inherently political dynamics of the field. Against We underline two emerging patterns in the curse of STS: the one of “depoliticisation” and the one of increasing “engagement”. We address the case study nanotechnologies and discuss their intertwined history with the STS. This allows us to point at the risk that the increasing institutionalisation of STS and the political mandate that frames and stabilizes the field’s relationship to the technological developments would create a political void. We conclude that STS research is at a crossroads. It is facing an important empirical turn, which may deprive it from its political significance, and constantly redefine its institutional constraints. STS has to continuously question its underlying political assumptions (as it occurs more and more regarding public participation) and to make it explicit.

The birth of the Belgian Network for Science, Technology and Society (BSTS Network)

in EASST Review (2012), 31(1), 9-12

Nanotechnologies, et alors?

Conference given outside the academic context (2012)

Étienne Klein, "Le Small Bang des nanotechnologies"

in Esprit (2012), 381

Nanotechnologies et « innovation responsable »: sur la gouvernementalité d’un concept

in Kermisch, Céline; Pinsart, Marie-Geneviève (Eds.) Les nanotechnologies : vers un changement d’échelle éthique ? (2012)

Fragments de notre condition numérique

Conference (2011, November 30)

Prospects for performing «responsible innovation» in research institutions

Conference (2011, November 09)

La normalisation des nanotechnologies

in Revue de la Faculté de Droit de l'Université de Liège (2011), (3-4), 427-444

Facebook, Twitter et la jeunesse arabe

Article for general public (2011)

Jocelyne Porcher, Vivre avec les animaux. Une utopie pour le XXIe siècle, La Découverte, coll. « textes à l'appui », 2011

in Lectures (2011)

"One to rule them all"? The standardisation of nanotechnologies

in European Journal of Risk Regulation (2011), 3

Pandémie A(H1N1) et gestion des risques : la responsabilité grippée ?

in Vergès, Etienne (Ed.) Droit, sciences et techniques: quelles responsabilités? (2011)

Recension: S. Lacour (dir.), La régulation des nanotechnologies. Clair-obscur normatif, coll. Droit des technologies, Bruxelles, Larcier, 2010, 288 pp.

in Cahier du Juriste (2011), 2

Le fantasme Facebook : n’est pas révolutionnaire qui veut !

Article for general public (2011)

Comment Facebook a changé le Monde? Le rôle des réseaux sociaux dans les révolutions arabes

Conference given outside the academic context (2011)

La conférence propose une analyse raisonnée du rôle précis des réseaux sociaux dans les premières révolutions arabes, particulièrement en Tunisie et en Egypte. Elle conclut à une approche critique du discours médiatique sur la question, qui propose une vision à la fois linéaire et totalement surévaluée de l'importance de ces technologies dans la genèse du mouvement social.

On Reflections and Reflexivity: Unpacking Research Dispositifs

in Zülsdorf, Torben; Coenen, Christopher; Ferrari, Arianna; Fiedeler, Ulrich; Milburn, Colin; Wienroth, Matthias (Eds.) Quantum Engagements: Social Reflections of Nanoscience and Emerging Technologies (2011)

Abstract. Science and Technology Studies (STS) scholars increasingly engage with science and technology (S&T) practitioners, scientists, engineers, and the like. The actual dynamics of these engagements differ from one project, framework or school to the next. However, to be reflexive, such engagements need at some point to deal with the ambiguous relationship between ‘engager’ and ‘engaged’. In an attempt to disambiguate these interactive ties, this chapter takes inspiration from Vinciane Despret, a philosopher of science who has provided ethnographic studies of ethologists. It specifically draws on two of Despret’s arguments about experiments on animals, more precisely rats, and the paradoxical relationships to which they give rise. By means of analogy, it then illustrates the similar ways in which we, as STS scholars, might happen to frame our interactions with S&T practitioners. It argues that any experimental research dispositif necessarily implies a specific relationship dynamic with whoever is engaged. This should not be considered as an obstacle, but instead an opportunity for learning—yet only if the dispositif is open to protest. The analysis here took shape during an engagement study conducted at a large-scale R&D center in Flanders, Belgium. It is informed by ongoing involvement in a broader research project (STIR) that aims at fostering reflexivity among S&T practitioners.

"Taming the publication machine", or Discourse Analysis made Subliminal

Conference (2010, November 15)

Opening the black box : agencies as socio-technical networks

Conference (2010, September 09)

Agencies have historically developed in Belgium, endorsing public activities not only at the federal level, but also at the level of decentralised governments (regions and communities). The current landscape in the Southern part of the county is more and more taking the form of a mosaic with very little efforts in terms of cooperation : this is particularly true when the agencies addressing similar target groups in a given sector are responding to different levels of governments with very little interaction, the coordination being organised by the users' themselves, according to their own strategies. At the same time, some agencies are taking more of a centre stage position : they not only provide services and support to their target group, they also fruitfully contribute to their status and identity building. Using a cultural approach may help study the "art of the state" in its diversity (Hood, 1998). We propose to concentrate the analysis on the emergence of two Agencies whose mission is to support professionals working in the public sector. Based on a recent field work on the transformation of the sector of public research, we will analyse how the FNRS (an agency funding public research) succeeded to survive as an independent agency through since 1928 (Halleux & Xhayet, 2008), adapting to the transforming socio-political context: it emerged as an industry based project and transformed into a "mertonian" institution of knowledge contributing to unify the scientific community at the level of the country, while bypassing the historical divisions of the three worlds of universities in the country (Fallon, 2009). A diachronic analysis helps underline how socially constructed is such an institution, and how the configuration of networks are continuously reshaping themselves to better be embedded in a specific historic society (Laborier, 2003). The FNRS is currently struggling to define new forms of cooperation with the universities (and their researchers) which are themselves embarked in the current stream of transformations introducing techniques derived from New Public Management in research organisations (de Boer, Enders, Schimank, 2007). In quite a different sector, another field work using the same methodological approach analysed the emergence of a very recent agency, EASI-WAL, serving the regional administration in order to encourage administrative simplicity (OCDE, 2003, 2005) and reported the shortcomings of this organisation in organising avenues for professional change with the civil servants (Thoreau, Fallon, Joris,2009). The two field work research were organised as case study analysis, with document analysis, face to face interviews and in situ observation, using research tools derived from the sociology of science (Actor-Network Theory in Callon,1986). The paper will present the outcomes of the analysis of the dynamics of the cooperation between the agency and its target groups (FNRS & researchers; EASI-WAL & civil servants) and their outcomes in terms of innovation and organisational learning. We observe the implementation of two institutions both designed to support the emergence of some common goal within their target collectives (elitist -research; administrative simplicity): they autonomously gave shape to their internal procedures of categorisation and hierarchisation, with identification processes contributing to the definition of institutional boundaries defining a specific field while ensuring its inscription in the network through a specific legitimating strategy (Douglas, 1986). This analysis will unveil some of the mechanisms of cooperation of the different stakeholders supporting the institution, and also the struggle between stakeholders for the definition of settings of participation and administrative and political control.

Taming the “Publication Machine”: Generating Unity, Engaging the Trading Zones

in Spontaneous Generations: A Journal for the History and Philosophy of Science (2010), 4(1), 163-172

In this paper, we explore the par ticular issue of a biomedical research team engaging itself in different “trading zones” (Galison 1997). We do so by following the specific process of setting up a new microscope. We star t by briefly introducing our general understanding of the concept of “trading zone.” Then we focus on the empirical material we collected, star ting from the microscope as the researchers we followed were setting it up. Our analysis is twofold: we first describe the acts we have been witnessing, then contrast them with the surrounding discourses and provide them with a rationale. We argue that the team created a sense of unity among its individual members and how this unity, though precarious, was needed and desired in order to fur ther engage in a trading zone.

Confronter l'incertain: les nanotechnologies et les "Science and Technology Studies"

in Piet, Grégory; Wintgens, Sophie (Eds.) La science politique dans tous ses états (2010, January)

Integrated Research and Protected Spaces: a New Role for STS?

Poster (2009, September 10)

Are bio and nano likely to be compared? If so, what are the consequences on public participation?

Conference (2009, March 29)

Like modern biotechnologies, nanotechnologies are a generic area of research linked with several interconnected disciplinary fields. They may be converted into a large panel of applications. It also brings, with its development, promises of a quite huge potential including important economic opportunities. Both of those emergent technologies also raise important social, ethical or environmental issues. Nevertheless, many substantive differences remain between biotechnologies and nanotechnologies. The former was introduced in society by a time public actors were less sensitive to public participation, as shows the history of parliamentary Technology Assessment. A lack of public participation is often told to have grounded some public opposition to some particular biotechnologies, with the usually quoted case of GMOs. The latter are currently under development in quite other circumstances, as social shaping of technology begins to be widely acknowledged and role played by STS community grows faster. Nanotechnologies deal with more uncertainties and more complexity. So it is commonly accepted that, within their development process, they should include more public participation to avoid some pitfalls of biotechnologies. Still, other differences that context exist between biotechnologies and nanotechnologies. It may be stressed that biotechnologies have left laboratories for a private financial designing of marketable products and that nanotechnologies are just starting to leave laboratories under great public impulsions, with wide public support and funding, as in the case of the National Nanotechnology Initiative in the US. So in the presentation we consider whether, given those differences, biotechnologies and nanotechnologies are likely to be compared. Then we pick a look to potential consequences related to public participation. Should there be more public participation? What for? Should it be driven in a different way?

From Bio to Nano: Learning From The Past to Shape the Future of Technology Assessment

Conference (2008, October 12)

In many Western countries over the last 35 years, the quest for more scientific governance on <br />crucial technological issues led to a broadening of the political world’s sphere of competences. <br />Indeed, various countries decided that dealing with global, invisible, irreversible and irreparable <br />risks had to be handled by an appropriate tool of management of technological innovations. So the <br />usefulness to institutionalize parliamentary Technology Assessment (PTA) offices emerged. <br />Nowadays, PTA is an instrument particularly suitable to study the new shape of science and <br />society’s interface and it represents a remarkable attempt to reform the institutional settings of <br />innovation. <br />However, while the overall uncertainty surrounding science and technology has been used by public <br />actors like parliamentarians or ministers in the past to legitimize a first generation of PTAs, the <br />emergence of a second generation in the 1990’s – centred on the constructive, interactive or <br />participatory TA approches – emphazises the co-evolution of technology and society rather than the <br />former linear determinist rationale. In this context, the STS community of scholars is increasingly <br />called upon by the public authorities to provide a “professional service role” (RIP, 1994), that is to <br />say to take a step into action out of the border of their intellectual engagement. <br />Then, we suggest to compare two successive periods by looking at the institutional management of <br />two distinct-but-complementary technological issues: biotechnology and nanotechnology. The <br />former has been taken into account by public actors at a time when the second generation of PTAs <br />was not yet rooted in the political practices. Thus, the management of the public debate related to <br />biotechnology has been characterized by a lack of sensitive, fruitful and interactive communication <br />between the stakeholders involved in the TA process, while the first applications were already being <br />commercialized. On the other hand, the latter is currently being tackled at a moment when the social <br />shaping of technology is widely acknowledged as well as the STS community may be invited to <br />pass from observation to participation in the political sphere. Given the uncertainty and complexity <br />encircling nanotechnology as well as its huge potential in many interconnected disciplinary fields, <br />the need to avoid the pitfall of the biotechnology’s experience is commonly accepted. <br />We offer to take nanotechnology as one of the most challenging technological issue to look beyond <br />the biotechnology’s roadblock and to show in which proportion the same scenario is reasonably <br />thinkable today, in order to spotlight whether we have learnt from the past in considering what is <br />1 <br />sometimes called “a new industrial revolution”. <br />We will raise some research questions like: how different are current TA practices as compared to <br />former ones? Are there new regimes emerging? Given the current technological convergence, how <br />complicated would it be to deal with NBIC technologies if we missed the point with biotechnology <br />alone? How suitable is PTA to engage in such interdisciplinary issues? Are we assisting the <br />emergence of a third PTA generation around the growing role of the STS community? How does <br />this scientific community dialogue with the historians of science who analyzed the earlier industrial <br />revolutions?

Appréhender l'incertitude: le Technology Assessment au service du processus décisionnel

in Pyramides: Revue du Laboratoire d'Études et de Recherches en Administration Publique (2008), 15(1),

Le présent article porte sur les processus de décision publique en situation d’incertitudes multiples, justifiant l’ouverture des frontières de l’objet de la décision et le recours à des instruments de production de connaissance particuliers. Dans un premier temps, nous mettrons en évidence les nouveaux référentiels structurant les processus décisionnels liés à des risques scientifiquement et socialement controversés. Dans un second temps, nous présenterons le « Technology Assessment » comme un outil de gestion publique des choix technologiques, et nous nous attacherons à décrire à la fois la pertinence et les limites de cet instrument de facilitation de la prise de décision dans un contexte marqué par sa complexité et largement empreint d’incertitude.