Turning Good into Gold: A Comparative Study of Two Environmental Invention Networks

Abstract

This article proposes three states in an actor-network and a global/local distinction among actants. This theoretical framework is applied to two invention networks: one created by an inventor of solar heating systems and another created by a designer who wanted to create an environmentally sustainable furniture fabric. Both solar inventor and fabric designer wanted to develop technologies that would improve the environment and also make money. The article concludes by considering whether invention networks that intend to turn “good into gold” have to evolve a shared representation or whether it is sufficient for a new design to serve as a boundary object for actants.

Understanding Development Project Implementation: An Actor-Network Perspective

“…But missing from this account is the epistemic: the knowledge‐related items that flow, from simple ideas to elements of discourse, mental models and frameworks of understanding. These have been identified by others as important intermediaries moving between global and local networks in projects generally (Gorman and Mehalik, ; Alderman and Ivory, ), and to play an important role in the life of development projects (Rossi, ; Mosse, ). Examples seen in the Sri Lanka project—such as the framing of what constitutes best practice in terms of technology or in terms of accounting standards—buttress the argument that this should be added to the scope of what is understood to pass between local and global networks.…”

“We're taking their brilliant minds”: Science teacher expertize, meta‐discourse, and the challenges of teacher–scientist collaboration

“…Collins et al () provide the example of a collaborative team, consisting of a chemist, an architect, a fashion designer, and a textile mill operator, developing an environmentally intelligent fabric. During their long‐term collaboration, the team members, who share a commitment to the product valued by everyone involved, come to understand one another's work and expertize and develop multiple interactional expertizes (see Gorman & Mehalik for more details on the case but examined using the construct of shared mental models rather than interactional expertize).…”

“…However, this kind of trading zone (one, i.e., heterogenous and relies on interactional expertize) requires the recognition of both expertizes as real, substantial and valuable. This requirement stands out in Gorman and Mehalik () examination of the environmental fabric case: new experts and expertizes are added to the project over time because they are seen as necessarily and essential to achieving the projects’ goals. Thus, in Center 2 in particular, the lack of interactional expertize among the scientists seemed to disrupt the process of even creating shared commitment to the project, which forced the teachers, John and Al, to spend considerable time trying navigate and build understanding of what they did as educators and the rationale behind their collaboration with the center.…”

Early engagement and new technologies: Opening up the laboratory

“…3 , 5 and 7 of this book; Fisher and Schuurbiers 2009 ;Gorman 2004 ;Gorman et al 2004Gorman and Mehalik 2002 ;Knorr-Cetina 1999 ). 3 , 5 and 7 of this book; Fisher and Schuurbiers 2009 ;Gorman 2004 ;Gorman et al 2004Gorman and Mehalik 2002 ;Knorr-Cetina 1999 ).…”