Michel Callon actually distinguishes four steps in the translation of actor networks (Callon, 1986):
1) Problematization: what is the issue that requires a solution? Who are the relevant actors? Can spokespeople be identified who can represent specific groups?
2) Interest: can these relevant actors be interested in the solution to the issue? What ‘terms of commitment’ are there, and/or how can they be convinced that their own interests will be served?
3) Enrolment: how can these common interests be converted into potential associations? Do the different actors also accept their role, or can they be geared to the available resources?
4) Mobilization of allies: is there wide support for the expected outcomes? Do the spokespeople actually represent their respective constituencies effectively, or how can the actor-network association be embedded in a wider setting?
Callon, M. (1986) ‘Some Elements in a Sociology of Translation’, in J. Law (ed.) Power, Action, Belief, pp. 196 ndash;229. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Callon, M. (1995) ‘Agency and the Hybrid Collectif’, The South Atlantic Quarterly 94(2): 481–507.
Callon, M. and Latour, B. (1981) ‘Unscrewing the Big Levithian’, in K. Knorr and A. Cicourel (eds) Advantages in Social Theory, pp. 277–303. New York: Routledge.
Callon, M. and Law, J. (1997) ‘After the Individual in Society’, Canadian Journal of
Sociology 22: 505–22.
Source:
Boelens, L. (2010) Theorizing practice and practising theory: Outlines for an Actor-Relational-Approach in Planning, Planning Theory 9(1): 28-62.
1) Problematization: what is the issue that requires a solution? Who are the relevant actors? Can spokespeople be identified who can represent specific groups?
2) Interest: can these relevant actors be interested in the solution to the issue? What ‘terms of commitment’ are there, and/or how can they be convinced that their own interests will be served?
3) Enrolment: how can these common interests be converted into potential associations? Do the different actors also accept their role, or can they be geared to the available resources?
4) Mobilization of allies: is there wide support for the expected outcomes? Do the spokespeople actually represent their respective constituencies effectively, or how can the actor-network association be embedded in a wider setting?
Callon, M. (1986) ‘Some Elements in a Sociology of Translation’, in J. Law (ed.) Power, Action, Belief, pp. 196 ndash;229. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Callon, M. (1995) ‘Agency and the Hybrid Collectif’, The South Atlantic Quarterly 94(2): 481–507.
Callon, M. and Latour, B. (1981) ‘Unscrewing the Big Levithian’, in K. Knorr and A. Cicourel (eds) Advantages in Social Theory, pp. 277–303. New York: Routledge.
Callon, M. and Law, J. (1997) ‘After the Individual in Society’, Canadian Journal of
Sociology 22: 505–22.
Source:
Boelens, L. (2010) Theorizing practice and practising theory: Outlines for an Actor-Relational-Approach in Planning, Planning Theory 9(1): 28-62.
No comments:
Post a Comment