Eurograd message

Dear colleagues,

Please find below a call for contributions for the journal Statistique et Société on the theme "micropolitics of measurement". This call stems from a workshop organized in June 2024 during the conference of the Society for Social Studies of Quantification. The deadline to send your abstract is April 18, 2025.

Best regards,

---

Statistique et Société – Call for Contributions

Micropolitics of measurement

Coordinators: Quentin Dufour (CNE, AMU), Camille Beaurepaire (Insee, CMH, ENS), and Siyu Li (Irasia, AMU)

Since the 1990s, the field of Social Studies of Quantification (SSQ) has emerged as an interdisciplinary field, probing the pervasive influence of numbers across societal domains. This scholarly pursuit, featuring seminal works (Desrosières 1998, Hopwood and Miller 1994, Porter 1995, Espeland and Stevens 1998), spans an array of numerically framed artifacts, official national and international statistics to specific objects such as financial indices, corporate management indicators, and the quantified self, attributable to the advent of digital technology (Didier, 2016; Diaz-Bone and Didier, 2016; Berman and Hirschman, 2018; Mennicken and Espeland, 2019; Mennicken and Salais, 2022).

Two pivotal research directions in quantification have been discerned, each spotlighting different stages in the trajectory of numbers (Didier, 2021). Firstly, the socio-history of quantification concentrates on the numbers production stage, particularly the genesis of measurement categories. Against a naturalized perspective on numbers, it unravels the socio-political contexts within which these categories are produced. It aims to demystify the origins, the interests steering their formation, and the societal or political realities they unveil or obscure (Espeland 1993; Adler 2002; Timmermans and Epstein 2010; Chiapello and Walter, 2016). Secondly, the exploration extends beyond numbers production, dwelling on the uses of quantification. Post-production, numbers begin to sculpt the social landscape, wielding significant influence and authority in public space (Porter, 1995). Inquiry along this direction shows the impact of numbers: their role in governance, their influence on social behaviors, and their capacity to forge new realms of subjectivity (Didier, 2011, 2018; Desrosières, 2014; Bruno et al, 2014; Supiot, 2015; Miller, 2001; Kurunmäki, Miller and Mennicken, 2016).

Navigating through these dual research pathways pinpoints the journey of numbers from category production to practical uses. We aim to augment the richness of SSQ by spotlighting an often overshadowed yet pivotal stage: the activity of measurement. This stage occurs after the stabilization of categories, where empirical elements are meticulously woven into established categories, to obtain numbers that can circulate and be used. Measurement activity, as defined here, encapsulates the pragmatic processes where actors, mobilizing tools and expertise, curate data from the empirical realm, aligning them with established categories. This nurtures the production of numbers, honed for diverse applications. We follow here a minor strand of research in SSQ developed by specific authors (Thévenot, 1983; Boltanski and Thévenot 1983; Desrosières and Thévenot, 2002). This line of research has sometimes been followed in studies on statistics (Caveng, 2012; Didier, 2020). Even more recently, work on new quantified-self devices has captured the importance of measurement practices in a singular form (Nafus, 2016).

Our approach seeks to enhance SSQ by spotlighting this overlooked yet critical phase: the micropolitics of measurement. We propose to move beyond the traditional segmentation of the number’s life cycle—namely, the establishment of conventions and the use of numbers—focusing instead on the relatively neglected juncture of these processes, which has been buried in the routine of practitioners. This phase of the quantification process, often unnoticed, involves intricate activities that elevate raw data to authoritative figures, a journey that is as political as it is technical. Drawing on Infrastructure Studies (Star and Ruhleder, 1996; Bowker, 1996; Star, 1999; Edwards, 2010; Edwards et al. 2011), and Data Studies (Borgman, 2015; Bates et al., 2016; Ebeling, 2016; Denis and Goëta, 2017; Leonelli and Tempini, 2020), three research axes guide our inquiry:

1. The Measure as a pivotal junction: We suggest measurement is the pivotal yet missing piece in the trajectory of numbers. It encapsulates the translation of empirical reality into quantifiable constructs, a process teeming with implicit choices and political underpinnings.

2. Bridging Socio-History and Measurement: In the socio-historical realm, we revisit the classical dyad of convention and measurement. Rather than treating them as distinct, we explore their interconnectedness and the degree to which they inform one another, thus enriching the tapestry of SSQ with questions of creation and continuity.

3. Anticipating the Impact of Usage: Recognizing that measurement is situated upstream in the trajectory of numbers, we also glimpse the foreshadowed questions of usage. Our perspective preemptively engages with how numbers, once measured, exert influence and shape actions within their subsequent domains of application.

Through this refined lens, the micropolitics of measurement invites a robust interrogation of data’s genesis, flow, categorization, and the resultant societal perceptions. It urges us to consider how data authority is established and the ensuing tensions within categorical confines. Moreover, it challenges us to scrutinize how practitioners mediate these intricacies during the measurement act. These explorations form the basis for a deeper understanding of the embedded politics within SSQ, heralding a new chapter of research in this dynamic field.

The expected articles will be based on a rich empirical material, and may address but are not limited to the following questions:

§ What processes give rise to data?

§ Through what channels does data traverse and exchange hands?

§ In what ways are the complexities of the world distilled into defined categories?

§ What role do measurement practices play in crafting our perceptions of reality?

§ How do numerical figures acquire their authoritative stance, and in whose eyes? What lends credence to these figures during the measurement process?

§ In what manner do the rigors of measurement strain or reaffirm the integrity of established categories?

§ How do practitioners within the measurement domain navigate the inherent tensions and resolve the conflicts that arise from their activities?

Practical information

As a first step, contributors are invited to submit an expression of interest (5,000 to 7,000 characters, or 3 to 4 pages), clearly presenting the research question, the sources and materials used, the analytical tools mobilized and the expected results.

These expressions of interest must be sent by April 18, 2025 to the journal editorial committee on the following address: contribution-statsociete@framalistes.org. Please mention in the subject line “Micropolitics of Measurement – Expression of Interest”.

Authors whose projects have been selected will be informed one month later (May 19, 2025) and must send their complete article by September 7, 2025.

Articles will be evaluated by referees from outside the editorial board, in accordance with the current procedure (see “Evaluation of articles”). The publication of the special issue is scheduled for the first half of 2026

For further details on article format and presentation expectations, please consult the “Instructions to Authors” on the journal’s website.

If you need any further information, please contact the coordinators:

quentin.dufour@cnrs.fr

beaurepaire.camille@gmail.com

siyu.li@univ-amu.fr

*About the journal* Statistique et Société

The journal Statistique et Société was created in 2013, with the aim of publishing analysis on the sources, roles, effects and uses of statistics and quantifications in modern societies. As an interdisciplinary journal, it publishes articles grounded in the field of social studies of quantification.

References

Alder, K. (2002). The Measure of All Things: The Seven-year Odyssey and Hidden Error that Transformed the World. Simon and Schuster.

Bates, J., Lin, Y.-W., & Goodale, P. (2016). Data journeys: Capturing the socio-material constitution of data objects and flows. Big Data & Society, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716654502

Berman, E., Hirschman, D., (2018). The Sociology of Quantification: Where Are We Now?. Contemporary Sociology, 47(3), 257-266.

Boltanski, L., & Thévenot, L. (1983). Finding one's way in social space: a study based on games. Social science information, 22(4-5), 631-680.

Borgman, C., (2015). Big Data, Little Data, No Data. Scholarship in the Networked World. The MIT Press.

Bowker, G. (1996). The history of information infrastructures: the case of the international classification of diseases. Information Processing and Management, 32(1) 42-61.

Bowker, G., & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting things out. Classification and its consequences. The MIT Press.

Bruno, I., Didier, E., & Vitale, T. (2014). Statactivism: Forms of Action between Disclosure and Affirmation. Partecipazione e conflitto. The Open Journal of Sociopolitical Studies, 7(2), 198-220. DOI: 10.1285/i20356609v7i2p198

Caveng, R. (2012). La production des enquêtes quantitatives. Revue d'anthropologie des connaissances, 6(1), 65-88. https://doi.org/10.3917/rac.015.00104.

Chiapello, E., & Walter, C. (2016). The three ages of financial quantification: a conventionalist approach to the financiers' metrology. Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung, 155-177.

Desrosières, A. (1998). The politics of large numbers: a history of statistical reasonning, Cambridge. Harvard University Press.

Desrosières, A. (2014). Prouver et gouverner: une analyse politique des statistiques publiques. La découverte.

Desrosières, A., & Thévenot, L. (2002). Les catégories socioprofessionnelles. La Découverte. https://doi.org/10.3917/dec.desro.2002.01

Diaz-Bone, R., & Didier, E. (2016). The Sociology of Quantification – Perspectives on an Emerging Field in the Social Sciences. Historical Social Research, 41, 726. https://doi.org/10.12759/HSR.41.2016.2.7-26

Didier, E. (2011). « Compstat » in Paris : A device for prompting police initiatives and accountability. Champ Pénal/Penal Field, Vol. VIII. https://doi.org/10.4000/champpenal.9028

Didier, E. (2016). Alain Desrosières and the Parisian Flock. Social Studies of Quantification in France since the 1970s. Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 41(2 (156)), 27‑47.

Didier, E. (2018). Globalization of Quantitative Policing: Between Management and Statactivism (SSRN Scholarly Paper 3245737). Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053308

Didier, E. (2020). America by the numbers: Quantification, democracy, and the birth of national statistics. The MIT Press.

Didier, E. (2021). Quantitative marbling. Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg.

Ebeling, M. F. E. (2016). Healthcare and Big Data: Digital Specters and Phantom Objects. Palgrave Macmillan US.

Edwards, P. (2010). A vast machine: Computer models, Climate data, and the politics of global warming. The MIT Press.

Edwards, P. N., Mayernik, M. S., Batcheller, A. L., Bowker, G. C., & Borgman, C. L. (2011). Science friction: Data, metadata, and collaboration. Social Studies of Science, 41(5), 667-690. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312711413314

Espeland, W. (1993). Power, policy and paperwork : The bureaucratic representation of interests. Qualitative Sociology, 16(3), 297‑317. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00990103

Espeland, W., & Stevens, M. 1998, Commensuration as social process. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1), 313-343.

Hacking, I. (1990). The taming of chance. Cambridge University Press.

Hopwood, A., Miller, P. (1994). Accounting as social and institutional practice. Cambridge University Press.

Kurunmäki, L., Mennicken, A., & Miller, P. (2016). Quantifying, economising, and marketising: democratising the social sphere?. Sociologie du travail, 58(4), 390-402.

Leonelli, S., & Tempini, N. (Eds.). (2020). Data journeys in the sciences. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37177-7

Mennicken, A., & Espeland, W., (2019). What’s New with Numbers? Sociological Approaches to the Study of Quantification. Annual Review of Sociology, 45, 223-245.

Mennicken, A., Salais, R. (Ed) (2022). The new politics of numbers. Utopia, evidence and democracy. Palgrave Macmillan.

Miller, P. (2001). Governing by Numbers: Why Calculative Practices Matter. Social Research, 68(2), 379‑396.

Nafus, D. (Éd.). (2016). Quantified: Biosensing technologies in everyday life. The MIT Press.

Porter, T. (1995). Trust in numbers. The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton University Press.

Star, S. L., & Ruhleder, K. (1996). Steps Toward an Ecology of Infrastructure: Design and Access for Large Information Spaces. Information Systems Research, 7(1),111-134.

Supiot, A. (2015). La gouvernance par les nombres. Fayard.

Thévenot, L. (1983). L’économie du codage social. Critiques de l’économie politique, 23(24), 188-222.

Timmermans, S., & Epstein, S. (2010). A world of standards but not a standard world: Toward a sociology of standards and standardization. Annual review of Sociology, 36(1), 69-89.

-- Quentin Dufour Chercheur CNRS Directeur adjoint de l'ISNS - PariSanté Campus quentindufour92@gmail.com https://cv.archives-ouvertes.fr/quentin-dufour +33 6 68 30 10 59

Centre Norbert Elias (UMR CNRS 8562) Aix-Marseille Université 2 rue de la Charité, 13002 Marseille EASST's Eurograd mailing list -- eurograd-easst.net@lists.easst.net Archive: https://lists.easst.net/hyperkitty/list/eurograd-easst.net@lists.easst.net/ Edit your delivery settings there using Account dropdown, Mailman settings. Website: https://easst.net/easst_eurograd/ Meet us on Mastodon: https://assemblag.es/@easst Or X: https://twitter.com/STSeasst