Social and Epistemic Control in Collaborative Research — Reconfiguring the Interplay of Politics and Methodology

References

• Agar, J. 2003. The Government Machine. A Revolutionary History of the Computer. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alinsky, S. 1989. Rules for Radicals. A Practical Primer for Realistic Radicals. New York: Vintage Books.
   Google Scholar
• Beniger, J. 2009. The Control Revolution: Technological and Economic Origins of the Information Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard university press.
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P. 1992. “The Practice of Reflexive Sociology (The Paris Workshop).” In Pierre Bourdieu & Loïc Wacquant: An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, 216–260. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burroughs, W. S. 1978. “The Limits of Control Semiotext(e).” Schizo-Culture 2 (2): 38–42.
   Google Scholar
• Daston, L. 1995. “The Moral Economy of Science.” Osiris 10: 2–24. doi:10.1086/368740.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G. 1992. “Postscript on the Societies of Control.” October 59, 3–7.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, P. N. 2010. A Vast Machine: Computer Models, Climate Data, and the Politics of Global Warming. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Escobar, A. 2018. Designing for the Pluriverse. Radical Independence, Autonomy and the Making of Worlds. Mexico City: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fals Borda, O. 2001. “Participatory (Action) Research in Social Theory: Origins and Challenges.” In Handbook of Action Research, edited by P. Reason and H. Bradbury, 27–37. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Farrell, K. N. [2005] 2009. Making Good Decisions Well: A Theory of Collective Ecological Management. Aachen: Shaker Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. 2005. The Order of Things. London, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Freire, P. [1996] 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. (et al.). London: Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Fuller, S. 2016. “Embrace the Inner Fox: Post-truth as the STS Symmetry Principle Universalized.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective. Accessed 16 October 2019. https://social-epistemology.com/2016/12/25/embrace-the-inner-fox-post-truth-as-the-sts-symmetry-principle-universalized-steve-fuller/#comments
   Google Scholar
• Fuller, S. 2018. Post-truth: Knowledge as a Power Game. Vol. 1. London: Anthem Press.
   Google Scholar
• Funtowicz, S. O., and J. R. Ravetz. 1993. “Science for the Post-Normal Age.” Futures 25: 739–755. doi:10.1016/0016-3287(93)90022-L.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert, J., and A. Goffey. 2015. “Control Societies: Notes for an Introduction.” New Formations: A Journal of Culture/Theory/Politics 84 (84): 5–19. doi:10.3898/NEWF:84/85.INTRODUCTION.2015.
   Google Scholar
• Herberg, J. 2018. “Public Administrators in the Europeanization of Risk Governance–Co-Creation Amidst the Political Heterarchy. Culture.” Practice and Europeanization 3 (2): 42–58.
   Google Scholar
• Hoppe, R. 2009. “Scientific Advice and Public Policy: Expert Advisers’ and Policymakers’ Discourses on Boundary Work.” Poiesis & Praxis 6 (3–4): 235–263.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jarmusch, J. 2009. “Archival Talks: Jim Jarmusch, ‘The Limits of Control’.” Film at Lincoln Center. YouTube. Accessed June 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v62aGp0v64k
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1993. We Have Never Been Modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 2004. “Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? from Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern.” Critical Inquiry 30 (2): 225–248. doi:10.1086/421123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leendertz, A. 2018. “Towards a New Diplomatic History of Transatlantic Relations.” In The TransAtlantic Reconsidered, edited by C. A. Lerg, S. Lachenicht, and M. Kimmage, 120–138. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Accessed 11 October 2019. https://www.manchesterhive.com/view/9781526119384/9781526119384.00011.x
   Google Scholar
• Lyall, C. 2019. Being an Interdisciplinary Academic: How Institutions Shape University Careers. Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Merchant, C. [1981] 1989. The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution. New York: Harper.
   Google Scholar
• Mirowski, P. 2002. Machine Dreams: Economics Becomes a Cyborg Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nowotny, H. 2005. “The Increase of Complexity and Its Reduction: Emergent Interfaces between the Natural Sciences, Humanities and Social Sciences.” Theory, Culture & Society 22 (5): 15–31. doi:10.1177/0263276405057189.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nowotny, H., P. Scott, and M. Gibbons. 2001. Re-thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pickering, A. 1995. The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Popp Berman, E. 2012. Creating the Market University: How Academic Science Became an Economic Engine. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rheinberger, H.-J. 2001. Experimentalsysteme und epistemische Dinge. Eine Geschichte der Proteinsynthese im Reagenzglas. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Schrickel, I. 2017. “Control versus Complexity: Approaches to the Carbon Dioxide Problem at IIASA.” Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte 40 (2): 140–159. doi:10.1002/bewi.201701821.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, J. C. 1998. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shinn, T. 2002. “The Triple Helix and New Production of Knowledge.” Social Studies of Science 32 (4): 599–614.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sismondo, S. 2017. Post-truth? Social Studies of Science 47 (1): 3–6. doi:10.1177/0306312717692076.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spivak, G. C. 1988. “Can the Subaltern Speak?” In Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, edited by C. Nelson and L. Grossberg, 271–313. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
   Google Scholar
• Steel, B., P. List, D. Lach, and B. Shindler. 2004. “The Role of Scientists in the Environmental Policy Process: A Case Study from the American West.” Environmental Science & Policy 7 (1): 1–13. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2003.10.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner, F. 2010. From Counterculture to Cyberculture: Stewart Brand, the Whole Earth Network, and the Rise of Digital Utopianism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, F. 2013. The Democratic Surround: Multimedia and American Liberalism from World War II to the Psychedelic Sixties. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vilsmaier, U., V. Brandner, and M. Engbers. 2017. “Research In-between: The Constitutive Role of Cultural Differences in Transdisciplinarity.” The Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering & Science 8: 169–179. doi:10.22545/2017/00093.
   Google Scholar
• Virilio, P. [1977] 2006. Speed and Politics. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weingart, P. 1997. “From ‘Finalization’ to ‘Mode 2ʹ: Old Wine in New Bottles?” Social Science Information 36: 591–613. doi:10.1177/053901897036004002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wesselink, A., and R. Hoppe. 2011. “If Post-normal Science is the Solution, What is the Problem?: The Politics of Activist Environmental Science.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 36 (3): 389–412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zuboff, S. 2015. “Big Other: Surveillance Capitalism and the Prospects of an Information Civilization.” Journal of Information Technology 30 (1): 75–89. doi:10.1057/jit.2015.5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar