Path creation as a discursive process: A study of discussion starters in the field of solar fuels.

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Social Studies of Science Pub Date : 2024-08-12 DOI:10.1177/03063127241271024
Eugen Octav Popa, Vincent Blok, Cornelius Schubert, Georgios Katsoukis
{"title":"Path creation as a discursive process: A study of discussion starters in the field of solar fuels.","authors":"Eugen Octav Popa, Vincent Blok, Cornelius Schubert, Georgios Katsoukis","doi":"10.1177/03063127241271024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When a technology is seen as the right solution to a recognized problem, the development of alternative technologies comes under threat. To secure much-needed resources, proponents of alternative technologies must, in these conditions, restart societal discussion on the status quo, a process at once technological and discursive known as 'path creation'. In this article, we investigate discussion-restarting strategies employed by supporters of emerging technologies in the field of solar fuels, particularly the advocates of a technology referred to as 'artificial photosynthesis'. For illustrative purposes we explore four such strategies: revisiting weak spots, resizing the problem, redefining the game, and renegotiating labels. We conclude with a methodological reflection on the empirical study of discursive strategies in a socio-technical system. We further suggest a more systematic application of discourse-analytical and argumentation-theoretical insights that can complement current scholarship on path dependence and path creation.</p>","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies of Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127241271024","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When a technology is seen as the right solution to a recognized problem, the development of alternative technologies comes under threat. To secure much-needed resources, proponents of alternative technologies must, in these conditions, restart societal discussion on the status quo, a process at once technological and discursive known as 'path creation'. In this article, we investigate discussion-restarting strategies employed by supporters of emerging technologies in the field of solar fuels, particularly the advocates of a technology referred to as 'artificial photosynthesis'. For illustrative purposes we explore four such strategies: revisiting weak spots, resizing the problem, redefining the game, and renegotiating labels. We conclude with a methodological reflection on the empirical study of discursive strategies in a socio-technical system. We further suggest a more systematic application of discourse-analytical and argumentation-theoretical insights that can complement current scholarship on path dependence and path creation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
作为话语过程的路径创造:对太阳能燃料领域讨论启动器的研究。
当一种技术被视为解决公认问题的正确方法时,替代技术的发展就会受到威胁。为了获得急需的资源,替代技术的支持者必须在这种情况下重新启动社会对现状的讨论,这一过程既是技术上的,也是话语上的,被称为 "路径创造"。在本文中,我们将研究太阳能燃料领域新兴技术支持者,尤其是 "人工光合作用 "技术倡导者所采用的重启讨论策略。为了说明问题,我们探讨了四种策略:重新审视薄弱点、调整问题规模、重新定义游戏和重新谈判标签。最后,我们对社会技术系统中话语策略的实证研究进行了方法论反思。我们还建议更系统地应用话语分析和论证理论的见解,以补充当前关于路径依赖和路径创造的学术研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Social Studies of Science
Social Studies of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Studies of Science is an international peer reviewed journal that encourages submissions of original research on science, technology and medicine. The journal is multidisciplinary, publishing work from a range of fields including: political science, sociology, economics, history, philosophy, psychology social anthropology, legal and educational disciplines. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
Beyond samplism: Rethinking the field in exposure science Making citizens, procedures, and outcomes: Theorizing politics in a co-productionist idiom. The techno-politics of computing the mind: Opening the black box of digital psychiatry. Categorical misalignment: Making autism(s) in big data biobanking. Marginalized measures: The harmonization of diversity in precision medicine research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1