Dear colleague,
<br>
<br>We would like to invite you to submit proposals for papers to our panel at
<br>EASST2018:*Meetings - Making Science, Technology and Society together*,
<br>25-28th July 2018, Lancaster University, UK, entitled *Publics shaped and
<br>enacted by surveillance and border biotechnologies: Encountering "phantom
<br>publics", "non-publics" and "counter publics"* described in detail below.
<br>
<br>The call for submissions closes February 14 2018.
<br>
<br>Best regards,
<br>
<br>Nina and Vasilis
<br>
<br>(E01) Publics shaped and enacted by surveillance and border
<br>biotechnologies: Encountering "phantom publics", "non-publics" and "counter
<br>publics" Convenors
<br>
<br> - Nina Amelung (University of Minho), e-mail: nina.amelung@ics.uminho.pt
<br> - Vasilis Galis (IT University of Copenhagen ), e-mail: vgal@itu.dk
<br>
<br>Short abstract
<br>
<br>In this panel we ask what publics are shaped and enacted by national and
<br>transnational surveillance and border biotechnologies and how can we study
<br>them by mobilizing the conceptual and methodological repertoire of STS.
<br>Long abstract
<br>
<br>In Europe, policy decisions dictated by executive powers after 9/11 have
<br>enabled new national and transnational surveillance and border
<br>biotechnologies to take shape in the name of controlled migration and
<br>preventing crime and terror. What publics are shaped and enacted by these
<br>technologies and how can we study them by mobilizing the conceptual and
<br>methodological repertoire of STS?
<br>
<br>The modus operandi of pre-emptive security measures builds on decisions
<br>calling upon what Gunnarsdóttir and Rommetveit termed "phantom publics"
<br>instead of testing such decisions' grounding. If the new 'centers of
<br>calculation' are the biometric data infrastructures of surveillance and
<br>border biotechnologies how can publics hold them accountable?
<br>
<br>An alternative take addresses categories deriving from the social sorting
<br>of technologies. Differentiating between trusted and distrusted travelers,
<br>low-risk and high-risk groups, documented and undocumented migrants have
<br>been regarded as dynamic and contested concepts. Dijstelbloem and Broeders
<br>have introduced the notion of "non-publics" to point to heterogeneous
<br>publics with ambiguous access to exercise their rights. How can shifted
<br>attention from pre-given classifications to ontological modifications of
<br>categories provide a perspective on the empowering and disempowering
<br>effects on publics?
<br>
<br>A third perspective focusses on "counter publics". Enacting for instance
<br>"subversive mobilities" or "temporary autonomous zones" by destabilizing or
<br>subverting routines and scripts of surveillance and border biotechnologies
<br>allows actors to claim rights and space that have either not yet been
<br>formally granted or cannot be exercised. How can actions with the potential
<br>to circumvent borders and surveillance create invigorated possibilities for
<br>renegotiating their performative power?
<br> https://nomadit.co.uk/easst/easst2018/conferencesuite.php/panels/6183)
<br>
<br>
<br>--
<br>
<br>*Nina Amelung*
<br>
<br>Research Fellow
<br>
<br>Project EXCHANGE (2015-2020), funded by the European Research Council
<br>(Grant agreement 648608)
<br>
<br>exchange.ces.uc.pt
<br>
<br>Communication and Society Research Centre (CECS) | University of Minho,
<br>Portugal
<br>_______________________________________________
<br>EASST's Eurograd mailing list
<br>Eurograd (at) lists.easst.net
<br>Unsubscribe or edit subscription options: http://lists.easst.net/listinfo.cgi/eurograd-easst.net
<br>
<br>Meet us via https://twitter.com/STSeasst
<br>
<br>Report abuses of this list to Eurograd-owner@lists.easst.net
view formatted text
