The Social Construction of Technology: Structural Considerations

Abstract

Although scholarship in the social construction of technology (SCOT) has contributed much to illuminating technological development, most work using this theoretical approach is committed to an agency-centered approach. SCOT scholars have made only limited contributions to illustrating the influence of social structures. In this article, the authors argue for the importance of structural concepts to understanding technological development. They summarize the SCOT conceptual framework defined by Trevor Pinch and Wiebe Bijker and survey some of the methodological and explanatory difficulties that arise with their approach. Then the authors present concepts from organizational sociology and political economy that illuminate structural influences in shaping phenomena of interest to SCOT scholars. These structural concepts can be applied to the study of the design, development, and transformation of technology. The authors conclude that the limited amount of scholarship on structural factors in the social shaping of technological development presents numerous opportunities for research.

Where are the politics in responsible innovation? European governance, technology assessments, and beyond

“…Power, force relations, and antagonism appear to reside elsewhere, outside the deliberative process. This is not to say that NanoSoc initiators denied conflict between actors; rather, they asserted that actors negotiate their different interpretations until they arrive at a solution that more or less satisfies the various parties (see Klein and Kleinman 2002). 13.…”

Discovering quiescent meanings in technologies: exploring the design management practices that support the development of Technology Epiphanies

“…The first one is the Social Construction of Technology (SCOT) and for it we refer to the seminal work of Pinch and Bijker (1987) where they state that the social structure of groups can influence the technology development. In particular SCOT is composed by four different concepts: interpretative flexibility, relevant social group, closure and stabilization and wider context (Klein, and Kleinman 2002). The second one is the Actor Network Theory (ANT) that is an approach that allow researchers to comprehend the interactions between humans and artefacts through out a given network (Cressman 2009).…”

Developing an Indicator System for Measuring the Social Sustainability of Offshore Wind Power Farms

“…SCOT practitioners use the phrase "human action shapes technology" to replace the phrase "technology determines human action." The SCOT conceptual framework can be summarized by the following four core components [19]: (1) Interpretive flexibility: Indicators can be constructed and interpreted flexibly. For the case of Taiwan's offshore wind power farm, the flexible construction of social sustainability indicators depends on the interactions among relevant social groups.…”