{"title":"超越采样:重新思考暴露科学领域","authors":"Sebastián Ureta","doi":"10.1177/03063127241288581","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Given the many forms of environmental pollution that have accompanied the global spread of industrial capitalism, there is an urgent need to carry out extensive assessments of the potential toxicity of many compounds on human and nonhuman populations. However, the scientific procedures developed to carry out such assessments present several critical shortcomings that greatly diminish their capacity to protect populations at risk. Through an ethnographic analysis of two field campaigns centered on the assessment of polluted sites in northern Chile, this article will reveal that these campaigns are embedded in what we can call samplism. Contrary to approaches that see fieldwork as generative spaces for knowledge creation, samplism radically simplifies the field into a neutral space for the collection of singular and well-defined lab-bound samples. However, samplism entails that multiple field phenomena relevant for assessing pollution levels are left completely unaccounted for, which greatly diminishes exposure science’s overall capacity to help improve the lives of those in need. Thus, exposure science urgently needs todevelop more capacious forms of engagement with the field, an ecological fieldwork that truly represents the complexity of forces and processes behind contemporary processes of pollution and damage.","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":"104 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond samplism: Rethinking the field in exposure science\",\"authors\":\"Sebastián Ureta\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/03063127241288581\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Given the many forms of environmental pollution that have accompanied the global spread of industrial capitalism, there is an urgent need to carry out extensive assessments of the potential toxicity of many compounds on human and nonhuman populations. However, the scientific procedures developed to carry out such assessments present several critical shortcomings that greatly diminish their capacity to protect populations at risk. Through an ethnographic analysis of two field campaigns centered on the assessment of polluted sites in northern Chile, this article will reveal that these campaigns are embedded in what we can call samplism. Contrary to approaches that see fieldwork as generative spaces for knowledge creation, samplism radically simplifies the field into a neutral space for the collection of singular and well-defined lab-bound samples. However, samplism entails that multiple field phenomena relevant for assessing pollution levels are left completely unaccounted for, which greatly diminishes exposure science’s overall capacity to help improve the lives of those in need. Thus, exposure science urgently needs todevelop more capacious forms of engagement with the field, an ecological fieldwork that truly represents the complexity of forces and processes behind contemporary processes of pollution and damage.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Studies of Science\",\"volume\":\"104 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-19\",\"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/10.1177/03063127241288581\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies of Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127241288581","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}
Beyond samplism: Rethinking the field in exposure science
Given the many forms of environmental pollution that have accompanied the global spread of industrial capitalism, there is an urgent need to carry out extensive assessments of the potential toxicity of many compounds on human and nonhuman populations. However, the scientific procedures developed to carry out such assessments present several critical shortcomings that greatly diminish their capacity to protect populations at risk. Through an ethnographic analysis of two field campaigns centered on the assessment of polluted sites in northern Chile, this article will reveal that these campaigns are embedded in what we can call samplism. Contrary to approaches that see fieldwork as generative spaces for knowledge creation, samplism radically simplifies the field into a neutral space for the collection of singular and well-defined lab-bound samples. However, samplism entails that multiple field phenomena relevant for assessing pollution levels are left completely unaccounted for, which greatly diminishes exposure science’s overall capacity to help improve the lives of those in need. Thus, exposure science urgently needs todevelop more capacious forms of engagement with the field, an ecological fieldwork that truly represents the complexity of forces and processes behind contemporary processes of pollution and damage.
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)