Calls for Papers
Find here non-event related calls for papers, such as special issue journals.
Last updated 03/11/2014 by Kathryn de Ridder-Vignone.
CALL FOR PROPOSALS: digitalSTS Volume
Deadline: May 15 2014
Updated: March 11 2014
Strong contributions will draw direct connections to topics, literatures, and inquiries of central importance to STS. They may also engage contributions from intersecting fields such as anthropology, communications, media studies, computer-supported cooperative work, and human-computer interaction. We encourage the broadest possible participation from individuals and groups working across Science and Technology Studies and its constitutive or intersecting domains.
In line with the principles and practices of the growing digitalSTS community, this Call for Proposals (and Things!) was generated by community members at the digitalSTS Workshop at 4S in October 2013. Submissions will be discussed and adjudicated in an open, online peer review format before the Editorial Team will select and solicit papers. We welcome all members of the STS community to participate in the process of reviewing proposals.
1. Theory and Cases (a.k.a. “The Handbook”): Submissions to the “Theory and Cases” section should explore or propose a significant or novel contribution to STS theory through an empirical case study focused on digital environments, objects, or practices. Through such studies, we aim tobuild a corpus of theory around the digital within STS, and also contribute to larger debates and established topics within the field (for example: social shaping, actor-networks, ontologies, expertise, feminist STS, science and technology policy, etc.).
2. Methods (a.k.a. “The Field-guide”): We seek submissions that address methods and methodologies for studies of the digital, broadly construed, as well as novel approaches that draw on the enabling capacities of digital approaches for investigations of STS topics. The digital presents many novel phenomena and also provokes a reexamination of existing objects of analysis for STS. The styles for submission are broad: we seek exemplary studies that demonstrate methods, or reflexive papers that explore high level methodologies and hands-on approaches.
3. Making (a.k.a. “The Scrapbook”): This section of the Handbook issues a “Call for Things” targeted at an audience of scholars, designers and makers as well as hybrid identities such as scholar/makers. The call is intended to bring together texts as well as visual materials (such as diagrams, images, prototypes, videos) that use design/making to engage with themes and theories about STS (such as power, materiality), design/making for STS (such as how visual materials and hands-on methods can be incorporated into STS) and design with STS (such as collaborations between scholars and makers).
* Note: We recognize that submissions may cross categories; these are provisional and it may be the case that the final handbook is organized otherwise.
Deadlines: Online Submission System will open in early April, 2014 Submissions Due May 15, 2014 Review period: May 16, 2014 – June 15, 2014
Science as Culture: Forum on Embedding Social Sciences?
Deadline: April 30 2014
Updated: March 11 2014
What should be the role of Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) in research agendas? How should SSH relate to the aims and assumptions of >such agendas, especially as regards innovation? What is the need and potential to open up the issues? How do/can SSH intervene in research >policy and priorities? >In discussions on the EU¹s 2014-2020 research programme, for example, a European Commission official suggested the need to Œembed¹ the SSH across all Societal Challenges, towards closer collaboration with science and engineering. How have the SSH been historically embedded? >How has this role changed recently? What analogies with journalists being embedded in military organisations? And what differences? What >kinds of collaboration should be promoted or avoided? How to generate debate on these issues? > Such a debate has been initiated by Uli Felt¹s article, ŒWithin, Across and Beyond: Reconsidering the Role of Social Science and Humanities in Europe. We invite commentaries for publication with her article in the September 2014 issue of Science as Culture.
Special issue of Cultural Studies of Science Education
Deadline: April 01 2014
Updated: March 11 2014
A general description of the focus of this Special Issues is: Many social theorists have noted that there are changes in the way that government has been organized, power exercised, and the public arena managed since the 1970s. These changes include—and here we are drawing upon the scholarship of Foucault (2008), Lemke (2011), and Cooper (2008):
an increased focus on the way that human populations are identified, managed, and neglected as part of the economic counter-revolution known as neoliberalism (the free market ideology which has achieved world wide dominance); concurrently, the importance of genomics, proteonomics, and other emergent fields of the technosciences in establishing the quality and nature of living, from genetically modified organisms to pharmaceutical controls over social being (e.g., in ADHD and cancer and heart attack risk management medications), from ecological controls to prosthetics and cyborg embodiments, emerging identities, subjectivities and performativities (i.e., ways of acting in public), such as the perpetual entrepreneurialism and life-long learning demanded by these new systems of institutional and societal management.
Together these changes are often labeled biopolitics, because life, especially its quality, management, and definition, is so central to these changes.
We are seeking contributions from scholars interested in these shifts, including (but not limited to) examinations of how biopolitics is shaping science education; how science education more broadly is responding or resisting biopolitics, and how science education curricula are coming to mirror biopolitical priorities. References
Cooper, M. (2008). Life as surplus: Biotechnology and capitalism in the neoliberal era. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Foucault, M., Senellart, M., & Collège de France. (2008). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978-79. Basingstoke England ; New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Lemke, T. (2011). Biopolitics: An advanced introduction. New York: New York University Press.
Designing Things Together: Intersections of Co-Design and Actor-Network Theory
Deadline: March 17 2014
Updated: February 15 2014
Special Issue of *CoDesign - International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts*
Guest editors: Cristiano Storni, Dagny Stuedahl, Thomas Binder and Per Linde.
In this call, we acknowledge the emergence of an interesting space at the intersection of co-design and Actor-Network Theory (ANT), especially as design research is confronted with increasingly complex issues such as sustainability, social responsibility, inclusion and democracy; and new approaches such as design activism, design participation, and social and participatory innovation. The influence of Science and Technology Studies (STS) on design research has a long history and it is still enjoying a great deal of attention (Hanset et al, 2004; Ingram et al, 2007; Woodhouse and Patton, 2004). Through the establishment of pioneering work in various disciplines such as architecture (Yaneva, 2008), participatory design (Ehn, 2008), human-computer interaction (DiSalvo, 2012), user-centred design (Steen, 2012), critical design (Ward and WIlkie, 2010) some design scholars have already started to explore this 'coming together' of theoretical thinking and design practices where different traditions, approaches and people meet. The interest is mutual and while some STS scholars have started to appreciate design as a key concern (Latour, 2008a,b, 2013; Yaneva, 2009; Storni, 2012), the more activist wing of STS are looking at design to extend and re-think the impact of social research (Woodhouse et al, 2002; Venturini, 2010).
As technology is becoming ubiquitous and pervasive, and design is increasingly recognized as a driving force for social change, approaches that draw on both STS (conceptually equipped to deal with socio-techno-scientific issues), and design (methodologically equipped to intervene in such issues) are of increasing importance. In this context, we are interested in exploring, mapping and more systematically investigating approaches emerging from exchanges in which ANT (as well as related STS approaches such as post-phenomenology, feminist and post-colonial studies) and co-design become mutually relevant. Indeed, participatory and collaborative design has a long tradition of focusing on the politics of design, the methods, tools and techniques used for democratic design, and the nature of participation (Kensing and Blomberg, 1998). These concerns seem to be shared by recent developments in ANT (e.g. Latour, 2004, 2008a,b) to further affirm that this emerging area is worth exploring and mapping. In this call, we aim to create an opportunity for exchange and reflection on the interesting intersections between ANT and co-design. We seek theoretical discussions as well as empirical case studies carried out using methodologies underpinning the ANT approach.
We seek reflections, connections and mutual influences; we seek new questions, a forward-looking attitude and constructive critical analysis. Specific topics may include but are not limited to: *ANT as a conceptual framework for participatory design and co-design* - ANT and material-semiotic/relational perspectives on design; - Design, *dasein*, (post-)phenomenology and ANT; - ANT to unpack the relationship and mutual shaping between design, technology and society; - ANT to rethink the design/use divide: design, meta-design, and appropriation; - How to use ANT as a pedagogical tool with design students; *ANT as a descriptive tool for co-design* - ANT as a descriptive tool supporting social investigation, design research and design processes; - ANT to re-think traditional notion of design and participation; - ANT to re-think (participatory and collaborative) design methods; - Design as translation/composition/instauration: implications for design and the design of designs; - ANT to rethink the ontological status of the design object/subject; *ANT and design for democracy and participation in techno-science* - ANT and design as a social experiment, design to make things public, design (for) public participation, design as mode of (co)existence; - ANT and critical design, design for debate; - ANT, '*cautious Prometheus'* and the issue of re-presentation: the role of design in the Ding-politik; - Design, care and matters of concern; - Mapping controversies, mapping participations, mapping design processes: implications for co-design;
Science Communication Ethics: State of the Art
Deadline: October 15 2014
Updated: December 03 2013
We live in a world highly dependent on science and technology, one that has been substantially modified by their application. As a result, communicating about science and understanding the complex relationship between science and society has gained ever-increasing importance. Yet, too often the focus of this research has been on the effectiveness of communicating science to non-experts, such as how to increase the understanding or acceptance of science. What have remained overlooked are the ethical considerations underlying this communication process. How ought science be communicated to non-expert audiences? What are the obligations of scientists and science communicators? What normative principles or standards should be respected in this sphere?
These questions were raised at the third Iowa State University Summer Symposium on Science Communication in the summer of 2013. In the course of organizing and conducting this event, it became increasingly clear that while scholarship on these overlooked ethical issues is growing, it remains scattered and on the periphery of science communication scholarship. As a result, the decision was made to pursue the creation of a theoretically informed collected volume on science communication ethics as a means to extend and share this work with audiences in science communication studies, science communication practice, science and technology studies, and the broader scientific and science policy communities.
The collected volume we plan will be open to scholars in all disciplines (as well as interested practitioners) who are able to connect their analyses to broader issues of theory in considering problems such as these:
• What are the underlying goals of science communication?
• What are the boundaries of appropriate advocacy and promotion?
• When are appeals to emotion ethical?
• When everyone can be a (science) journalist, does anything go?
• What ethical obligations do scientists have to communicate to broader publics?
• What ethical requirements should govern discussions of risks, benefits, “facts,” and uncertainties?
• How can public engagement be encouraged, and are some forms more valuable than others?
• What is the role of the political process in the management of science and technology?
• How can empirical work on the perceptions of ethics and related issues among various stakeholders and on effective teaching strategies for ethics contribute to clarity in this domain?
We invite contributions of 5000-7000 words that consider one of these or any other issue in the ethics of science communication and that are explicitly informed by some aspect of theory taken from the social sciences or humanities. The submission of ideas or extended abstracts to any of the editors for comment well prior to this deadline is strongly encouraged.
The fourth ISU Summer Symposium (29-31 May, 2014) is also open for scholars to receive feedback on early versions of work that might be considered for this collection. For information on this summer’s event, see http://scicomm.las.iastate.edu/summer-symposia/2014-summer-symposium/
Special Issue “Methods of Innovation Research” in HSR (“Historical Social Research / Historische Soz
Deadline: November 30 2013
Updated: October 06 2013
The special issue "Methods of Innovation Research" aims at exploring a broader set of research methods and theory-method-bundles for approaching processes of innovation in social sciences. Papers should address one of the questions below either at a more general methodological level or using a concrete example in a specific research project: \
Which qualitative and/or quantitative methods are best suited for which kind of theoretical problems in innovation research? Are there new ways of linking theory and methods? What methodological innovations concerning innovation-research can be observed? How can we use the whole set of traditional social science methods or how can they be adjusted to address problems in innovation research? Which types of comparison can help us to grasp processes of innovation more adequately? Which sampling strategies are appropriate for grasping processes of innovation? What are the specific data requirements for analysis of innovation and how can these data be collected? Which strategies of data analysis are appropriate? Which techniques of case-selection are appropriate? How can we combine different forms of data or data-analysis to gain new insights in innovation- research?
We especially welcome contributions beyond the narrow aisle between thick ethnographic descriptions of activities in labs or indicator-based observations of whole regions or nations dominant in innovation research today. Researchers can ask how we can grasp the special, highly complex processes of invention and diffusion of new symbolic or material artefacts methodologically or which combination of theories and methods are appropriate for such an endeavour.
It is listed in the most important data bases, such as SocINDEX with FULL TEXT (EBSCO), Social Science Citation Index (Thomson Reuters), SCOPUS (Elsevier), Sociological Abstracts (Cambridge Scientific Abstracts), Historical Abstracts (ABC- CLIO), International Political Science Abstracts (SAGE), Social Research Methodology Database (SAGE / NIWI) and Social Science Literature Information System (GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences). 2013. The abstract 2013 – submission of abstracts with paper proposals 2014 – notification of acceptance of paper proposals for the Special Issue in HSR 2014 – submission of first draft of full paper – October 18th 2014 – submission of the final version of the paper 2014 – Author Conference (voluntary, there will be travel allowances
The Information Society Connecting Fields: Information, Learning Sciences and Education
Deadline: December 15 2013
Updated: September 10 2013
The ways in which people interact with information is evolving rapidly. For example, modern questions about life, love, and where to eat for dinner are negotiated over platforms such as Yelp or Instagram, and well established information environments such as Wikipedia, Twitter, and Reddit are being reconsidered as sites for situated learning. We are fast moving away from clearly demarcated technologies and arenas for information sharing or learning, and instead, evolving toward blended realms of public, peer-oriented interaction made possible by new social norms and technological affordances. This blurring of boundaries affords an opportune moment to consider the connections between information and education, or the information sciences and learning sciences.
We need to build bridges between fields, institutions, communities and practices. This blending and merging represents an analytical opportunity to decipher trends, institutionalized assumptions and norms, and conspicuous omissions. We are soliciting abstracts that exemplify this bi-directional perspective, and bring together scholars from multiple fields interested in aspects of information, learning, and education. We welcome both empirical or conceptual works that: (1) critically integrate a lens from information science if the research is grounded in the learning sciences or education, or (2) rigorously incorporate a learning or educational lens if grounded in information science or related fields. We hope that this special issue will be a foundational touchstone through which scholars across information science, learning sciences, and other cognate fields can build a new discourse. We encourage contributions that come from a wide range of perspectives, including (but not limited to): The role of information behavior in learning processes with digital and participatory media The role of information or education institutions, organizations, and networks in facilitating new forms of learning and credentialing Applications of information science, computation, and learning analytics to create new models for continuous feedback, information driven instructional practice, and personalized learning Applications of human-centered design to support and develop new modalities for learning such as games for learning, simulations, mobile and embodied/tangible computing Crowds and online communities (e.g., citizen science, Twittersphere) as Communities of Practice The role of hacker/maker spaces and libraries within the evolving learning ecosystem The role of technology in enabling new institutional logics within education (i.e., massively open online courses (MOOCs), Institute of Play’s Quest Schools in New York and Chicago, and Peer2Peer University) The relationship between information and education policy Any other topics that can be a touchstone for scholars at the intersection of information, learning, and education
Call for Papers - Special issue of the Journal of Peer Production Shared Machine Shops
Deadline: September 30 2013
Updated: September 10 2013
Beyond Local Prototyping and Manufacturing Editors
Maxigas (Universitat Oberta de Catalunya)
Peter Troxler (International Fab Lab Association, Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences)
In the last years we have witnessed an incredible proliferation of shared machine shops in a confusing number of genres: hackerspaces, makerspaces, Fab Labs and their more commercial counterparts such as TechShops, co-working spaces, accelerators and incubators. These are currently "fringe phenomena" because they play a minor role in the production of wealth, knowledge, political consensus and the social organisation of life. Interestingly, however, they also experience the same core transformations as contemporary capitalism. That is, for the individual: the convergence of work, labour and other aspects of life. On a systemic level: the rapid development of algorithmically driven technical systems and their intensifying role in social organisation. Finally, as a corollary: the practical and legitimation crisis of modern institutions, echoed by renewed attempts at self-organisation. Arguably, hackers occupied such an ambiguous position since the beginning of hackerdom, but shared machine shops represent a new configuration.
They appear as embodied communities organised in research and production units of physical and logical goods; they even appear to escape the subcultural ghetto as educational institutions, museums, and libraries start to integrate them into their ambit. They are eminent laboratories in both their practices and products: as experimental forms of social institutions, and as the developers of technological prototypes projecting new visions of the future. Industry actors, state authorities and policy makers have recognised such milieus as prolific grounds for recruitment and new organisational models, which in itself warrants critical attention. Inspired by all these developments, we dedicate the next special issue of the Journal of Peer Production to Fab Labs and similar places. Some of the questions we are interested in exploring:
* What are the historical conditions and concrete genealogies which enabled the emergence of shared machine shops? (Can we talk about the renewed relevance of craftsmanship?) * Are rapid prototyping practices changing the relationships to technology, research and development, and innovation? (Are shared machine shops democratising knowledge and production or rather building a new maker elite?) * How do technologies cultivated in shared machine shops such as personal fabrication intervene in urban and rural geographies? (Is the time ripe for "global villages" or we have to adapt to "smart cities"?) * What new and old anthropologies and ethics are articulated in shared machine shops? (Who is the “New Man” of Peer Production?) * Finally, how do shared machine shops interface with the political economy of contemporary capitalism and the military-industrial complex? (If the means of production are in the hands of the workers, is that free labour, a new form of outsourcing, or the germ for a next revolution?)
History and Philosophy of Technoscience
Updated: May 10 2013
We would like to announce a new series of monographs and collected papers. It explores research practice across the disciplines and throughout history by foregrounding its technological setting: - when the problems to be investigated are themselves the product of science and technology in the modern world, - when technical and predictive control is sought within the technological infrastructure of models, instruments, measurements, computational methods, and media technologies, - when research accomplishments change the world materially more so than our thinking about it.
From nanotechnology to the environmental sciences, from alchemy to pharmacy, from solid state physics to human factors research, how are problems defined, what counts as an explanation, how are findings validated, how do values enter in? And most importantly for civic observers of contemporary research: How is robustness and reliability achieved even where we lack theoretical understanding?
Members of the editorial board include Hanne Andersen (Aarhus), Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent (Paris), Martin Carrier (Bielefeld), Graeme Gooday (Leeds), Don Howard (Notre Dame), Ann Johnson (South Carolina), Cyrus Mody (Rice), Maureen O’Malley (Sydney), Roger Strand (Bergen) and Nancy Tuana (Pennsylvania State). For more information write to Alfred Nordmann or Philip Good or see http://www.pickeringchatto.com/technoscience
The ESRC Genomics Network - Genetics and Society Book Series
Deadline: June 01 2015
Updated: April 14 2011
The ESRC Genomics Network - Genetics and Society Book Series provides an outlet for outstanding scholarship in the multiple fields of genetics and genomics social sciences research. Published with Routledge since 2006, the research monographs, handbooks, textbooks, and edited collections offer authoritative, cutting edge perspectives on issues covering the ethical, legal, social, economic or political aspects of:
* tissue engineering, enhancement, and cloning * genetic modification of foodstuffs and other organisms, * neuroscience and neuroethics * genetic screening and testing * stem cell research and reproductive technologies * psycho-social aspects of medical genetics and gene therapy * the social and ethical issues surrounding biomedical innovation * public engagement and political discourse * representations of genetics across the media and cultural spheres * regulatory policy and governance of biomedical research and its human applications * the sociology and anthropology of bio-science and bio-technology * bioethics * the economics of new biomedical technologies and their place in the ‘knowledge economy’
Proposals for new titles within the scope of these topic areas are encouraged from individuals and groups. Please see the book proposal submission guidelines and application form.
Further information, requests and queries contact:
Helen Greenslade, Editorial Manager Cesagen Cardiff University 6 Museum Place Cardiff CF10 3BG
Asian Biotechnology and Development Review (ABDR): Call for Articles, Reviewers
Updated: May 16 2010
The Asian Biotechnology and Development Review (ABDR) is a peer reviewed journal published by Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS) from New Delhi, India. It is supported by Life Science Division of UNESCO and Department of Biotechnology of Government of India. This Journal is abstracted in CAB Abstracts. ABDR is guided by an Editorial Board and Editorial Advisory Board with distinguished experts, policy makers, academics, representatives of UN organizations as members.
ABDR is now into its 12th Volume ABDR has been a forum for informed views and perspectives on biotechnology and development issues. The contents of past issues except the last two issues can be downloaded from RIS website. ABDR is listed under journals in the publications section in the RIS website http://www.ris.org.in
ABDR has published articles on a wide variety of issues ranging from Access and Benefit Sharing to Bioethics in Asia, from regulation of stem cells to biosafety and international trade, from Bt. cotton in India to regulating biotechnology in Australia. ABDR has published Special Issues also focusing on a particular theme.
Besides articles ABDR publishes Book Reviews. Articles that provide a perspective on an issue or analyze an important case (e.g. Decision by WTO Panel/Appellate Body) can be considered for publication.
The guidelines for contributors are available in the website. When an article is submitted it is immediately acknowledged and the review process is set in motion. We strive to publish the accepted articles as early as possible. ABDR welcomes articles, book reviews and other contributions. ABDR does not publish articles that are solely of scientific or technical in nature. The readership of ABDR is spread across the globe. While the contents of the past issues will give an idea about the nature and scope of the articles and book reviews published in ABDR, articles on themes and topics not covered before particularly articles on socio-economic impacts of emerging biotechnologies and developments in life sciences, and bioeconomy will be considered for publication. The scope of the contributions to ABDR need not be restricted to biotechnology related issues in Asia or developing countries.
ABDR is also interested in empanelling reviewers for doing peer-review of articles. Those interested in doing peer review are requested to submit a brief CV and their areas of specialization/expertise. Submissions can be sent by email to the Managing Editor and there is no need to send the same in CD/hard copy if submission is by email.
The Construction of Personal Identities Online: a Special Issue of Minds and Machines
Deadline: December 15 2011
Updated: January 15 2010
Information and communication technologies (ICTs) are building a new habitat (infosphere) in which future generations will spend an increasing amount of time. So, how individuals construct, shape and maintain their personal identities online (PIOs) is a problem of growing and pressing importance. Today, PIOs can be created and developed, as an ongoing work-in-progress, to provide experiential enrichment, expand, improve or even help to repair relationships with others and with the world, or enable imaginative projections (the "being in someone else's shoes" experience), thus fostering tolerance. However, PIOs can also be mis-constructed, stolen, "abused", or lead to psychologically or morally unhealthy lives, causing a loss of engagement with the actual world and real people.
The construction of PIOs affects how individuals understand themselves and the groups, societies and cultures to which they belong, both online and offline. PIOs increasingly contribute to individuals' self-esteem, influence their life-styles, and affect their values, moral behaviours, and ethical expectations. It is a phenomenon with enormous practical implications, and yet, crucially, individuals as well as groups seem to lack a clear, conceptual understanding of who they are in the infosphere and what it means to be a responsible informational agent online. This special issue of Minds and Machines seeks to fill this important gap in our philosophical understanding. It will build on the current debate on PIO, and address questions such as:
- How does one go about constructing, developing and preserving a PIO? Who am I online?
- How do I, as well as other people, define and re-identify myself online?
- What is it like to be that particular me (instead of you, or another me with a different PIO), in a virtual environment?
- Should one care about what happens to one's own PIO and how one (with his/her PIO) is perceived to behave online?
- How do PIs online and offline feedback on each other?
- Do customisable, reproducible and disposable PIOs affect our understanding of our PI offline?
- How are we to interpret cases of multiple PIOs, or cases in which someone's PIO may become more important than, or even incompatible with, his or her PI offline?
The special issue is part of a series of workshops organised in connection with the AHRC-funded project The Construction of Personal Identities Online. Authors may also wish to submit their papers to one of the workshops organized on the same topic. Submissions will also be considered for publication in the special issue.
The Body in Breast Cancer: a Special Issue of Social Semiotics
Deadline: October 01 2010
Updated: January 15 2010
Social Semiotics invites submissions to a special issue “The Body in Breast Cancer” in order to mobilize new critical interventions into the materiality of breast cancer.
The body, at the level of the breast, is the terrain on and through which breast cancer registers. This body, as understood through poststructuralist theory, is always already constructed and negotiated in relation to technology. This body, then, is a technologized body. The experience of breast cancer at once compels particular interfaces of body and machine in detection, treatment, and “recovery,” and the necessity for corporeal reworking in relation to the machine. Stressing the material breast as a technologized terrain necessitates grappling with the myriad of troubled relations of/to the breast, such as the prosthetic breast, the absent breast, fear of the lost breast, refusal of the breast, the scrutinized fleshy breast. In order to enable such exploration, we solicit papers in the fields of science and technology studies, queer studies, cultural studies, performance studies, and disability studies that enter into dialogue with scholarship on (bio)technologies and/or the posthuman. Foregrounding the technologized materiality in breast cancer will yield new ways of understanding subjectivity and somatic resistance, crafting corporeality, and practicing critique/politics in order to extend “livable lives.”
We are especially interested in accounts of queer, non-white, crip, male, classed bodies, and other particularities of subjecthood, that explore the practices of the technologized body in breast cancer at the level of machine and science, and imagined through biotech, the cyborg, cybernetics, prostheses, biometrics, and so forth.
We welcome articles that investigate:
• Excavations of the breast that foreground the policing, containment, mutilation, resignification, and crafting of the breast
• Bodies in breast cancer surveillance
• Bodies and breast reconstruction
• Bodies in treatment (radiation, the chemotherapy ward, detection, ultrasound, MRI, biopsy, mammogram, the breast clinic)
• Bodies and traces of military technologies; marks of cancer treatment
• Body-erotics/sexuality and breast cancer
• Visual economies of the breast and legalities of breastlessness
• The body and prognosis in breast cancer
• Altered notions of bodily capacity in relation to breast cancer
• Breasted aesthetics as self-crafting/disciplining
• Renegotiations of subjectivity at the interface with machines
• Unstable assemblages between flesh and machine in detection, risk assessment, prognosis
• Cancer and matter
• Regeneration and illness
General Call for Papers: East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal
Updated: January 13 2010
Daiwie Fu, National Yang Ming University, Taiwan
Warwick Anderson, University of Sydney, Australia / University of Wisconsin-Madison, US
Pingyi Chu, Academic Sinica, Taiwan
Sungook Hong, Seoul National University, South Korea
Togo Tsukahara, Kobe University, Japan
EASTS is an interdisciplinary quarterly journal based in Taiwan guided by editorial boards of STS scholars from Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and the West. Founded in 2007, EASTS provides an international platform for STS scholarship on East Asia. The goal of the journal is to bring Western and East-Asian STS communities together to share ideas, knowledge and research on the full range of topics encompassed by STS. EASTS promotes STS studies from and to the East Asian and worldwide STS communities.
Submit Your Paper Now!
Papers should be submitted via Editorial Manager: http://www.editorialmanager.com/east
Recent Special Issues:
Constructing Intimacy: Technology, Family and Gender in East Asia
Guest Editor: Francesca Bray
Gender and Reproductive Technologies in East Asia
Guest Editors: Adele E. Clarke, Azumi Tsuge and Chia-Ling Wu
The Globalisation of Chinese Medicine and Meditation Practices
Guest Editor: Elisabeth Hsu
Emergent Studies of Science and Technology in Southeast Asia
CFP: Global Surveillance and Forms of Resistance. Vol 11, Nº 2
July 01 2014 |
Deadline: March 31 2014
Updated: February 15 2014
The truth suspected by many has been corroborated through the documents leaked by Edward Snowden in June 2013. These documents are evidence of the existence of a massive surveillance plan designed by the US National Security Agency (NSA), in collaboration with other national agencies and private companies.
The first document leaked to the media showed the agreement between the NSA and the communications company Verizon, which grants access to the metadata of all calls made inside the US. It was further announced that the fiber optic cables that transport the network and telephone information are tapped, and their data copied and stored. It then became known that there are governmental agreements with technological corporations, such as Facebook, Google, Skype, Yahoo and Hotmail, to warrant the NSA complete access to the users' data. There is also proof that presidents, ministers and high level politicians worldwide have been intensively spied upon. In short, any citizen can be easily monitored.
The NSA has admitted that they monitor 1.6% of the world's Internet data flow. However, digital technologies evolve exponentially in their capacity of storage, management and analysis. So the question is, what is the actual information processing capacity? In this sense, governmental surveillance converges with marketing and entertainment industries in the development of more sophisticated techniques of data analysis and social profiling. The “information revolution,” known as Big Data, tests these techniques to improve commercial success, however they can easily be transferred to systems of public management and social control.
The capacity for control from digital technologies was already known, but the leak of original documents was necessary to open up a public debate. Now, it is also necessary that we do not settle this debate in conformist terms, such as the expressed ideas: “what I say or do is not relevant”, “I don't have anything to hide”, etc. In Teknokultura, we want to make a call to critical intellectuals and activists to improve the analysis of the situation and to visualize joint lines of action. To such an end, we are looking for texts that answer any of the following questions or related ideas:
Analysis and diagnosis of the situation
What is the structure and what are the techniques used to capture and exploit the data? What technical details are important to know? What are the relations and roles of the different entities and social agents involved: secret agencies (NSA, CIA, etc), technological corporations (Google, Facebook, Apple, IBM), and Data Mining companies, etc.? What is the relationship between global surveillance and other dimensions of analysis, such as geopolitics, social movements, the global economy and/or the financial crisis?
Forms of resistance
What are some of the options for global resistance, collectively and individually? What are the projects in development? How can we counteract the inertia of the conformist attitudes that suggest that we accept the ongoing global control processes? What technical knowledge and social attitudes are necessary to become a resistant citizen against surveillance?
We invite you to answer any of these questions or make other make other suggestions that will question the hegemonic interpretations of the actual situation.
You can submit a long article (7000 words max) for the <
Inquiries: March 31, 2014 Articles: May 15, 2014 Publication date: July 15, 2014.
Coordinators: Javier de Rivera y Ángel Gordo
Sources and related documents:
NSA Files Decoded. What the revelations mean to you. The Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/nov/01/snowden-nsa-files-surveillance-revelations-decoded#section/1
Timeline of Edward Snowden's revelations. Aljazeera http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/multimedia/timeline-edward-snowden-revelations.html
Interactive Graphics: The NSA's Spy Catalog http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/a-941262.html
Jacob Appelbaum Speech at Chaos Computer Conference 2013 http://www.theverge.com/2013/12/30/5256636/nsa-tailored-access-jacob-appelbaum-speech-30c3
The Real Privacy Problem. Evgeny Morozov. MIT Technology Press http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/520426/the-real-privacy-problem/