Security knowledges: circulation, control, and responsible research and innovation in EU border management

References

• Andromeda. 2021. Andromeda expected impact. Available at https://www.andromeda-project.eu/project/ambition.html
   Google Scholar
• Aradau, C. and Blanke, T. (2010) Governing circulation: A critique of the biopolitics of security, in: M. de Larrinaga and M. G. Doucet (Eds) Security and Global Governmentality: Globalization, Governance and the State, pp. 44–56 (London: Routledge).
   Google Scholar
• Aradau, C. and Perret, S. (2022) The politics of (non-)knowledge at Europe’s borders: Errors, fakes, and subjectivity, Review of International Studies, 48(3), pp. 405–424. doi:10.1017/S0260210522000080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Austin, J. L., Bellanova, R., and Kaufmann, M. (2019). Doing and mediating critique: An invitation to practice companionship. Security Dialogue, 50(1), pp. 3–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baird, T. (2017) Knowledge of practice: A multi-sited event ethnography of border security fairs in Europe and North America, Security Dialogue, 48(3), pp. 187–205. doi:10.1177/0967010617691656
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellanova, R., Jacobsen, K. L. and Monsees, L. (2020) Taking the trouble: Science, technology and security studies, Critical Studies on Security, 8(2), pp. 87–100. doi:10.1080/21624887.2020.1839852
   Google Scholar
• Bigo, D. (2014) The (in)securitization practices of the three universes of EU border control: Military/Navy – border guards/police – database analysts, Security Dialogue, 45(3), pp. 209–225. doi:10.1177/0967010614530459
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bigo, D., Jeandesboz, J., Martin-Maze, M. and Ragazzi, F. (2014) Review of Security Measures in the 7th Research Framework Programme, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) (Brussels: European Parliament)).
   Google Scholar
• Binder, C. (2020) Developing future borders: The politics of security research and emerging technologies in border security, in: A. Calcara, R. Csernatoni, and C. Lavallée (Eds) Emerging Security Technologies and EU Governance Actors, Practices and Processes, pp. 148–63 (Oxon: Routledge).
   Google Scholar
• BorderSens. 2021. Bordersens in brief. Main objectives. Available at https://bordersens.eu/
   Google Scholar
• Bourne, M., Johnson, H. and Lisle, D. (2015) Laboratizing the border: The production, translation and anticipation of security technologies, Security Dialogue, 46(4), pp. 307–325. doi:10.1177/0967010615578399
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess, J. P., Reniers, G., Ponnet, K., Hardyns, W. and Smit, W. (Eds) (2018) Socially Responsible Innovation in Security: Critical Reflections (Oxon: Routledge).
   Google Scholar
• Burget, M., Bardone, E. and Pedaste, M. (2017) Definitions and conceptual dimensions of responsible research and innovation: A literature review, Science and Engineering Ethics, 23, pp. 1–19. doi:10.1007/s11948-016-9782-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callon, M. (2006) What does it mean to Say that economics is performative?, in: D. MacKenzie, F. Muniesa, and L. Siu (Eds) Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Callon, M. and Law, J. (2004) Introduction: Absence–presence, circulation, and encountering in complex space, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 22(1), pp. 3–11. doi:10.1068/d313
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cordis. 2019. Augmented Reality Enriched Situation awareness for Border security (ARESIBO), Grant Agreement ID: 833805. Available at https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/833805
   Google Scholar
• De Goede, M. (2020a) Engagement all the way down, Critical Studies on Security, 8(2), pp. 101–115. doi:10.1080/21624887.2020.1792158
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Goede, M. (2020b) Secrecy vignettes, in: M. De Goede, E. Bosma, and P. Pallister-Wilkins (Eds) Secrecy and Methods in Security Research: A Guide to Qualitative Fieldwork, pp. 261–272 (Oxon: Routledge).
   Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. K. (2000) The practices and politics of interpretation, in: N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research, pp. 897–922 (2nd ed.) (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage).
   Google Scholar
• Dijstelbloem, H. and Meijer, A. (2011) Migration and the New Technological Borders of Europe (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).
   Google Scholar
• Dillon, M. and Lobo-Guerrero. (2008) Biopolitics of security in the 21st century: An introduction, Review of International Studies, 34(2), pp. 265–292. doi:10.1017/S0260210508008024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D4FLY. 2021. Research topics. Available at https://d4fly.eu/
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, C., Adams, T. and Bochner, A. (2011) Autoethnography: An overview, Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 36(4), pp. 273–290. (138) Conventions and Institutions from a Historical Perspective.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, S. W., Leese, M. and Rychnovska, D. (2020) Science, technology, security: Towards critical collaboration, Social Studies of Science, 51(2), pp. 189–213. doi:10.1177/0306312720953515
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2014. Directorate-General for research and innovation, Responsible research and innovation – Europe's ability to respond to societal challenges. Available at https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/2be36f74-b490-409e-bb60-12fd438100fe/language-en/format-PDF/source-search
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2020a. Responsible research & innovation. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/responsible-research-innovation
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2020b. Security research in H2020. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2018-2020/main/h2020-wp1820-security_en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2022. Horizon europe work programme 2021-2022 6. Civil security for society. European Commission Decision C(2022) 2975 of 10 May 2022. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/horizon/wp-call/2021-2022/wp-6-civil-security-for-society_horizon-2021-2022_en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Felt, U. (2014) Within, across and beyond: Reconsidering the role of social sciences and humanities in Europe, Science as Culture, 23(3), pp. 384–396. doi:10.1080/09505431.2014.926146
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (2007) Security, Territory, Population (Basingstoke: Palgrave).
   Google Scholar
• Frontex. 2020a. Frontex to provide border security expertise to European Commission’s research projects, News Release, February 6. Available at https://frontex.europa.eu/media-centre/news/news-release/frontex-to-provide-border-security-expertise-to-european-commission-s-research-projects-ZrCBoM
   Google Scholar
• Frontex. 2020b. Frontex helping to bring innovation to future border control, News Release, August 11. Available at https://frontex.europa.eu/media-centre/news/news-release/frontex-helping-to-bring-innovation-to-future-border-control-VetIX5
   Google Scholar
• Frontex. 2020c. Future of border control: EU research. Available at https://frontex.europa.eu/future-of-border-control/eu-research/introduction/
   Google Scholar
• Frontex. 2021. ARESIBO project overview. Available at https://frontex.europa.eu/assets/EUresearchprojects/News/ARESIBO.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Gläser, J., and Velarde, K.S. (2018) Changing funding arrangements and the production of scientific knowledge: Introduction to the Special Issue. Minerva, 56, pp. 1–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. (1988) Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective, Feminist Studies, 14(3), pp. 575–599. doi:10.2307/3178066
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, B., Jones, C., and Töpfer, E. (2014) Eurodrones. Inc. (London: Statewatch and Transnational Institute).
   Google Scholar
• Herberg, J. (2020) Control before collaborative research – Why phase zero is not Co-designed but scripted, Social Epistemology, 34(4), pp. 395–407. doi:10.1080/02691728.2019.1706122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herberg, J. and Vilsmaier, U. (2020) Social and epistemic control in collaborative research – Reconfiguring the interplay of politics and methodology, Social Epistemology, 34(4), pp. 309–318. doi:10.1080/02691728.2019.1706115
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphreys, M. (2005) Getting personal: Reflexivity and Autoethnographic vignettes. Qualitative Inquiry, 11(6), pp. 840-860.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. (Ed) (2004) States of Knowledge: The co-Production of Science and Social Order (Oxon: Routledge).
   Google Scholar
• Jeandesboz, J. (2016) Smartening border security in the European Union: An associational inquiry, Security Dialogue, 47(4), pp. 292–309. doi:10.1177/0967010616650226
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, C., et al. (2011) Interventions on rethinking ‘the border’ in border studies, Political Geography, 30(2), pp. 61–69. doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2011.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klimburg-Witjes, N. and Huettenrauch, F. C. (2021) Contextualizing security innovation: responsible research and innovation at the smart border?, Science and Engineering Ethics, 27), doi:10.1007/s11948-021-00292-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kloppenburg, S. and van der Ploeg, I. (2020) Securing identities: Biometric technologies and the enactment of human bodily differences, Science as Culture, 29(1), pp. 57–76. doi:10.1080/09505431.2018.1519534
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Law, J. and Mol, A. (2002) Complexities: Social Studies of Knowledge Practices (Durham, NC: Duke University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Lee, B. and LiPuma, E. (2002) Cultures of circulation: The imaginations of modernity, Public Culture, 14(1), pp. 191–213. doi:10.1215/08992363-14-1-191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leese, M. (2016) Exploring the security/facilitation nexus: Foucault at the ‘smart’ border, Global Society, 30(3), pp. 412–429. doi:10.1080/13600826.2016.1173016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leese, M., Lidén, K. and Nikolova, B. (2019) Putting critique to work: Ethics in EU security research, Security Dialogue, 50(1), pp. 59–76. doi:10.1177/0967010618809554
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehtonen, P. and Aalto, P. (2017) Smart and secure borders through automated border control systems in the EU? The views of political stakeholders in the Member States, European Security, 26(2), pp. 207–225. doi:10.1080/09662839.2016.1276057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levidow. (2014) Introduction to Sac forum: ‘embedding social sciences?’, Science as Culture, 23(3), pp. 382–383. doi:10.1080/09505431.2014.926148
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levidow, L. and Neubauer, C. (2014) Eu research agendas: embedding what future?, Science as Culture, 23(3), pp. 397–412. doi:10.1080/09505431.2014.926149
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leydesdorff, L. and Etzkowitz, H. (1998) The triple helix as a model for innovation studies’, Science and Public Policy, 25(3), pp. 195–203.
   Google Scholar
• Mackenzie, A. (2005) The Performativity of Code: Software and Cultures of Circulation, Theory, Culture & Society, 22(1), pp. 71–92. doi:10.1177/0263276405048436
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin-Mazé, M. and Perret, S. (2021) Designs of borders: Security, critique, and the machines, European Journal of International Security, 6(3), pp. 278–300. doi:10.1017/eis.2021.8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martins, B. O. and Ahmad, N. (2020) The security politics of innovation: Dual-use technology in the EU’s security research programme, in: A. Calcara, R. Csernatoni, and C. Lavallée (Eds) Emerging Security Technologies and EU Governance Actors, Practices and Processes, pp. 58–73 (Oxon: Routledge).
   Google Scholar
• Martins, B. O. and Kuesters, C. (2019) Hidden security: EU public research funds and the development of European drones, JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 57(2), pp. 278–297. doi:10.1111/jcms.12787
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martins, B. O. and Jumbert, M. G. (2022) EU Border technologies and the co-production of security ‘problems’ and ‘solutions’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 48(6), pp. 1430–1447. doi:10.1080/1369183X.2020.1851470
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martins, B. O., Lidén, K. and Jumbert, M. G. (2022) Border security and the digitalisation of sovereignty: insights from EU borderwork, European Security, 31(3), pp. 475–494. doi:10.1080/09662839.2022.2101884
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mol, A. and Law, J. (2004) Embodied action, enacted bodies: the example of hypoglycaemia, Body & Society, 10(2-3), pp. 43–62. doi:10.1177/1357034X04042932
   Google Scholar
• Owen, R., Macnaghten, P. and Stilgoe, J. (2012) Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society, Science and Public Policy, 39(6), pp. 751–760. doi:10.1093/scipol/scs093
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, N. and Vaughan-Williams, N. (2009) Lines in the sand? towards an agenda for critical border studies, Geopolitics, 14(3), pp. 582–587. doi:10.1080/14650040903081297
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, N. and Vaughan-Williams, N. (2012) Critical border studies: Broadening and deepening the ‘lines in the sand’ agenda, Geopolitics, 17(4), pp. 727–733. doi:10.1080/14650045.2012.706111
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rijpma, J. J. (2017) Brave new borders: The EU’s use of new technologies for the management of migration and asylum, in: M. Cremona (Eds) New Technologies and EU Law, pp. 197–241 (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Salter, M. B. (2012) Theory of the/: The suture and critical border studies, Geopolitics, 17(4), pp. 734–755. doi:10.1080/14650045.2012.660580
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salter, M. B. (2006) The global visa regime and the political technologies of the international self: borders, bodies, Alternatives, 31(2), pp. 167–189. doi:10.1177/030437540603100203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salter, M. B., et al. (2019) Horizon Scan: Critical security studies for the next 50 years, Security Dialogue, 50(4S).
   Google Scholar
• Steen, M. (2021) Slow Innovation: the need for reflexivity in Responsible Innovation (RI), Journal of Responsible Innovation, 8(2), pp. 254–260. doi:10.1080/23299460.2021.1904346
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stierl, M. (2020) Do no harm? The impact of policy on migration scholarship, Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 40(5), pp. 1083–1102. doi:10.1177/2399654420965567
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, J. and Guston, D. H. (2017) Responsible research and Innovation, in: U. Felt (Eds) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, pp. 853–880 (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press).
   Google Scholar
• Suchman, L. (2020) Algorithmic warfare and the reinvention of accuracy, Critical Studies on Security, 8(2), pp. 175–187. doi:10.1080/21624887.2020.1760587
   Google Scholar
• Trauttmansdorff, P. (2022) The fabrication of a necessary policy fiction: the interoperability ‘solution’ for biometric borders, Critical Policy Studies, DOI: 10.1080/19460171.2022.2147851
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toros, H. (2016) Dialogue, praxis and the state: a response to Richard Jackson. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 9(1), pp. 126-130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogel, K. M., et al. (2017) Knowledge and Security, in: U. Felt, et al. (Eds) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, pp. 973–1001, 4th ed. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
   Google Scholar
• Walters, W. (2011) Foucault and frontiers: notes on the birth of the humanitarian border, in: U. Bröckling, S. Krasmann, and T. Lemke (Eds) Governmentality: Current Issues and Future Challenges, pp. 138–164 (Oxon: Routledge)).
   Google Scholar
• Wichum, R. (2013) Security as dispositif: Michel Foucault in the field of security, Foucault Studies, 15, pp. 164–171. doi:10.22439/fs.v0i15.3996
   Google Scholar