{"title":"Making citizens, procedures, and outcomes: Theorizing politics in a co-productionist idiom.","authors":"Hilton R Simmet","doi":"10.1177/03063127241269804","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The literature engaging political theory in STS often puts forward a deficit model view of STS, in which homegrown STS ideas about politics, such as co-production, are either treated as having an insufficient account of the political or not read as political theory at all. This article challenges the deficit discourse by reading co-production as a full-blown political theory in its own right, in particular by showing how it investigates normative questions of 'the good' that are central to any theorization of politics. Where political theory often concerns itself with the construction and application of universal political ideals-such as of the good citizen, legitimate procedures or smart outcomes-co-production looks at empirical sites where citizens, procedures, and outcomes articulate understandings of the good held by political actors in situ. By looking at the making of citizens, procedures, and outcomes in practice, we can better understand co-production as political theory. In particular, co-production elaborates on how the making of citizens, procedures, and outcomes constitute (and are constituted by) ideal normative positions, including: authoritative views about what citizens may claim to know, culturally-situated understandings of procedural legitimacy, and political values and ideologies embedded in seemingly 'objective' measurements of outcomes.","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":"33 1","pages":"3063127241269804"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","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/10.1177/03063127241269804","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
The literature engaging political theory in STS often puts forward a deficit model view of STS, in which homegrown STS ideas about politics, such as co-production, are either treated as having an insufficient account of the political or not read as political theory at all. This article challenges the deficit discourse by reading co-production as a full-blown political theory in its own right, in particular by showing how it investigates normative questions of 'the good' that are central to any theorization of politics. Where political theory often concerns itself with the construction and application of universal political ideals-such as of the good citizen, legitimate procedures or smart outcomes-co-production looks at empirical sites where citizens, procedures, and outcomes articulate understandings of the good held by political actors in situ. By looking at the making of citizens, procedures, and outcomes in practice, we can better understand co-production as political theory. In particular, co-production elaborates on how the making of citizens, procedures, and outcomes constitute (and are constituted by) ideal normative positions, including: authoritative views about what citizens may claim to know, culturally-situated understandings of procedural legitimacy, and political values and ideologies embedded in seemingly 'objective' measurements of outcomes.
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)