Open Journal Systems

Users and non-users in engineering and feminist participatory research on sustainable aviation

Julia Stilke, Sandra Buchmüller

Abstract


Within engineering, economics, and the natural sciences, sustainable aviation is often configured as an ecological and economic problem, which can be solved through technological innovation. In contrast to this, we set up a research project centering on social innovation, named Human demands of sustainable aviation. In the project, we combined theories from Feminist Science and Technology Studies (FSTS) with methods from Participatory Design (PD) and practice-based Ontological Design (OD). In this paper, we use our project as a case study to analyze and discuss how users and non-users are configured within different disciplinary contexts. The findings illustrate that conceptualizations and categorizations of users and non-users are not stable. They denote highly situated phenomena that emerge out of different research approaches and understandings of innovation. Power structures that are entangled with the positions researchers take, including specific theories, methods, and (implicit) values, pervade these contexts and understandings. With this in mind, we advocate for power-critical reflections on the performative effects of knowledge making as processes of world making and for inter- and transdisciplinary research to do justice to the different life worlds we inhabit. We further argue that innovation should be based on collectively negotiated visions of how we want to live in the future, instead of predictions that project our current realities into the status quo of tomorrow.

Keywords


feminist science and technology studies; ontological design; participatory design; social innovation; feminist innovation studies; sustainable aviation

Full Text:

PDF

References


Åkerman, J. (2005). Sustainable air transport – on track in 2050. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 10(2), 111-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2004.11.001

Akrich, M. (1992). The De-Scription of Technical Objects. In W. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping Technology / Building Society (p. 131-159). MIT Press.

Alston, M. (2013). Introducing Gender and Climate Change. Research, Policy and Action. In M. Alston & K. Whittenbury (Eds.), Research, Action and Policy: Addressing the Gendered Impacts of Climate Change (p. 3-14). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5518-5_1

Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822388128

Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of women in culture and society, 28(3), 801-831. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/345321

Benschop, Y., & Husu, L. (2021) Close Encounters of the Feminist Kind with Research and Innovation; Editorial Feminist Encounters: A Journal of Critical Studies in Culture and Politics, 5(2), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.20897/femenc/11155

Berg, A.-J. (1999). A gendered socio-technical construction: the smart house. In D. MacKenzie & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The social shaping of technology (2nd ed., p. 301-313). Open University Press.

Berglund, K., & Pettersson, K. (2021). Innovation Beyond Borders: On Alternative Feminist Discourses of Innovation. Feminist Encounters: A Journal of Critical Studies in Culture and Politics, 5(2), 22. https://doi.org/10.20897/femenc/11158

Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P., & Hillgren, P. A. (2010, November). Participatory design and "democratizing innovation". In Proceedings of the 11th Biennial participatory design conference (p. 41-50). https://doi.org/10.1145/1900441.1900448

Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P., & Hillgren, P. A. (2012). Agonistic participatory design: working with marginalised social movements. CoDesign, 8(2-3), 127-144. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2012.672577

Chen, W., & Wellman, B. (2004). The global digital divide – within and between countries. IT&Society, 1(7), 18-25.

Cockburn, C., & Ormrod, S. (1993). Gender and Technology in the Making. SAGE Publications Ltd.

Cruz-Jesus, F., Oliveira, T., & Bacao, F. (2018). The Global Digital Divide: Evidence and Drivers. Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), 26(2), 1-26. https://econpapers.repec.org/article/iggjgim00/v_3a26_3ay_3a2018_3ai_3a2_3ap_3a1-26.htm

Denton, F. (2002). Climate change vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation: Why does gender matter? Gender & Development, 10(2), 10-20. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4030569

Ehn, P., & Badham, R. (2002, June). Participatory design and the collective designer. In Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, Sweden (p. 1-10). https://www.cpsr.org/issues/pd/pdc2002/

Ehrnberger, K., Räsänen, M., & Ilstedt, S. (2012). Visualising gender norms in design: Meet the mega hurricane mixer and the drill dolphia. International Journal of design, 6(3), 85-98. http://www.ijdesign.org/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/1070

Escobar, A. (2018). Designs for the Pluriverse. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822371816

European Commission (2011). Flightpath 2050: Europe’s Vision for Aviation. Report of the High Level Group on Aviation Research. https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/modes/air/doc/flightpath2050.pdf

Fichert, F. (2020). Aviation subsidies in Europe and regional development. In A. Graham, N. Adler, H.-M. Niemeier, O. Betancor, A. P. Antunes, V. Bilotkach, E. J. Calderón, G. Martini (Eds.), Air Transport and Regional Development Policies (p. 123-137). Routledge.

Ford, H., & Wajcman, J. (2017). ‘Anyone can edit’, not everyone does: Wikipedia’s infrastructure and the gender gap. Social studies of science, 47(4), 511-527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312717692172

Fuglestvedt, J., Berntsen, T., Myhre, G., Rypdal, K., & Skeie, R. B. (2008). Climate forcing from the transport sectors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(2), 454-458. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0702958104

Gössling, S., Fichert, F., & Forsyth, P. (2017). Subsidies in aviation. Sustainability, 9(8), 1295. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081295

Gössling, S., & Humpe, A. (2020). The global scale, distribution and growth of aviation: Implications for climate change. Global Environmental Change, 65, 102194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102194

Griffin, G. (2021). Feminising Innovation: Challenges in Science and Technology Studies (STS). Feminist Encounters: A Journal of Critical Studies in Culture and Politics, 5(2), 28 https://doi.org/10.20897/femenc/11161

Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist studies, 14(3), 575-599. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066

Harding, S. (2016). Whose science? Whose knowledge?. Cornell University Press.

Heuwieser, M. (2017). The Illusion of Green Flying. Finance and Trade Watch. http://www.ftwatch.at/flying_green

Hofman, J. (1999). Writers, texts and writing acts. In D. MacKenzie & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The social shaping of technology (2nd ed., p. 222-243). Open University Press.

Huffman, S. (2018): The Digital Divide Revisited: What is Next? Education, 138(3), 239-246.

Humphreys, L. (2005). Reframing Social Groups, Closure, and Stabilization in the Social Construction of Technology. Social Epistemology, 19(2-3), 231-253. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691720500145449

Israel, A. L., & Sachs, C. (2013). A Climate for Feminist Intervention: Feminist Science Studies and Climate Change. In M. Alston & K. Whittenbury (Eds.), Research, action and policy: Addressing the gendered impacts of climate change (p. 33-51). Springer.

Kantenbacher, J., Hanna, P., Cohen, S., Miller, G., & Scarles, C. (2018). Public attitudes about climate policy options for aviation. Environmental Science & Policy, 81, 46-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.12.012

Law, John (2015). What's wrong with a one-world world? Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory, 16(1), 126-139. https://doi.org/10.1080/1600910X.2015.1020066

Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. Routledge.

Law, J., & Urry, J. (2004). Enacting the social. Economy and society, 33(3), 390-410. https://doi.org/10.1080/0308514042000225716

Lee, D. S., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Newton, P. J., Wit, R. C. N., Lim, L. L., Owen, B., & Sausen, R. (2009). Aviation and global climate change in the 21st century. Atmospheric Environment, 43(22), 3520-3537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.04.024

Lee, D. S., Fahey, D. W., Skowron, A., Allen, M. R., Burkhardt, U., Chen, Q., ... & Wilcox, L. J. (2021). The contribution of global aviation to anthropogenic climate forcing for 2000 to 2018. Atmospheric Environment, 244, 117834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117834

Mol, A. (1999). Ontological politics. A word and some questions. The sociological review, 47(1_suppl), 74-89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1999.tb03483.x

Mouffe, C. (2000). The Democratic Paradox. Verso.

Mouffe, C. (2016). Democratic Politics and Conflict: An Agonistic Approach. Política común, 9. https://doi.org/10.3998/pc.12322227.0009.011

Müller, C., Kieckhäfer, K., & Spengler, T. S. (2018). The influence of emission thresholds and retrofit options on airline fleet planning: An optimization approach. Energy Policy, 112, 242-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.10.022

Nold, C. (2018). Practice-based ontological design for multiplying realities. Strategic Design Research Journal, 11(2), 58-64. http://revistas.unisinos.br/index.php/sdrj/article/view/sdrj.2018.112.02

Okonkwo, P., & Smith, H. (2016). Review of evolving trends in blended wing body aircraft design. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 82, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2015.12.002

Olivier, J. G., Schure, K. M., & Peters, J. A. H. W. (2020). Trends in global CO2 and total greenhouse gas emissions. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 5. https://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/downloads/pbl-2020-trends-in-global-co2-and_total-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2020-report_4331.pdf

Oudshoorn, N. E. J., & Pinch, T. (2003). Introduction: How users and non-users matter. In N. E. J. Oudshoorn, & T. Pinch (Eds.), How users matter. The co-construction of users and technology (p. 1-25). MIT Press.

Pecis, L., & Berglund, K. (2021). Hidden in the limelight: A feminist engagement with innovation studies. Organization. 28(6), 993-1017, https://doi.org/10.1177/13505084211015380

Pecis, L. (2016). Doing and Undoing Gender in Innovation: Femininities and Masculinities in Innovation Processes. Human Relations, 69(11), 2117-2140. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726716634445

Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1984). The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social studies of science, 14(3), 399-441. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631284014003004

Robertson, T., & Simonsen, J. (2013). Routledge international handbook of participatory design. Routlege.

Rothengatter, W. (2010). Climate change and the contribution of transport: Basic facts and the role of aviation. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 15(1), 5-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2009.07.005

Schulte-Fortkamp, B. (2013). Soundscape – focusing on resources. Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics – ASA, 19, 40117. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4800409

Schulte-Fortkamp, B., Brooks, B. M., & Bray, W. R. (2007). Soundscape: An approach to rely on human perception and expertise in the post-modern community noise era. Acoustics Today, 3(1), 7-15. https://acousticstoday.org/soundscape-approach-rely-human-perception-expertise-post-modern-community-noise-era/

Schulte-Fortkamp, B., & Fiebig, A. (2006). Soundscape analysis in a residential area: An evaluation of noise and people's mind. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 92(6), 875-880.

Sciannamblo, M., Lyle, P., & Teli, M. (2018). Fostering Commonfare. Entanglements between Participatory Design and Feminism. In Proceedings of DRS 2018 (p. 458-471). Loughborough University. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2018.557

Star, S. & Griesemer, J. (1989). ‘Institutional Ecology’, 'Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387-420. https://www.jstor.org/stable/285080

Suchman, L. (2009). Agencies in technology design: Feminist reconfigurations. Proceedings of 5th European Symposium on Gender & ICT, Digital Cultures: Participation–Empowerment–Diversity (5 p.). http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/soteg/gict2009/proceedings/GICT2009_Suchman.pdf

Suchman, L. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions. Cambridge university press.

Suchman, L. (1993). Do categories have politics? The language/action perspective reconsidered. In Proceedings of the Third European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work 13–17 September 1993, Milan, Italy ECSCW’93 (p. 1-14). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-2094-4_1

Suchman, L. (1993). Do categories have politics?. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 2, 177-190. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00749015

Styhre, A. (2013). A Social Theory of Innovation. Copenhagen Business School Press DK.

Terrenoire, E., Hauglustaine, D. A., Gasser, T., & Penanhoat, O. (2019). The contribution of carbon dioxide emissions from the aviation sector to future climate change. Environmental research letters, 14(8), 084019. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab3086/pdf

Wajcman, J. (1991). Patriarchy, technology, and conceptions of skill. Work and Occupations, 18(1), 29-45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888491018001002

Wajcman, J. (2000). Reflections on Gender and Technology Studies: In which State is the Art? Social Studies of Science, 30(3), 447-464. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631200030003005

Wajcman, J. (2010). Feminist theories of technology. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34(1), 143-152. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/ben057

Walker, S., & Cook, M. (2009). The contested concept of sustainable aviation. Sustainable Development, 17(6), 378-390. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.400

Whitelegg, J. (2000). AVIATION: the social, economic and environmental impact of flying. Ashden Trust.

WHO (2018). Environmental noise guidelines for the European region. World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe. https://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/383921/noise-guidelines-eng.pdf

Yousefikhah, S. (2018). Sociology of Innovation: Social Construction of Technology perspective. AD-minister, 2018(30), 31-43. https://doi.org/10.17230/ad-minister.30.2




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/nocsi.v0i3.91148

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.