iea dsm task 24 workshop domestication of technologies in every day life
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Domestication of technologies in every day lifeMargrethe Aune, Dep. of Interdisciplinary Studies of Culture, Center for Technology and Society, NTNU
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
Outline of the talk
• Why domestication? Background• What is domestication?• Experiences and examples of
domestication • Why domestication? Some good reasons
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
Why domestication? Innovation and the effects of technology
• Studies of innovation:– Innovation as a linear process from laboratory to
marked products diffuse into the market
• Studies of effects on technology in society– Technological optimism or pessimism determinism
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
Innovation domestication• Problem:
– Deterministic approaches Technology has effects, technology causes social change
– Diffusion approaches Technology used as intended or rejected
• No focus on processes in the market. What happens when technology meets the user? – Processes of cultural integration?– Processes of “social innovation”?
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
What is domestication? Cultural integration + social innovation• Domestication was tried out as a concept
to capture these processes– User focus, process focus, non-deterministic
• Allows a much more detailed analysis of the interaction between humans and technologies
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
Main inspiration for ”STS-Trondheim” (1992): •Media studies
– Domestication in relation to the ”moral economy of the household” (Silverstone et al, Haddon)
•Science and Technology Studies– Script and program/anti-program, the consumption junction
(Akrich, Latour, Cowan)•Studies of consumption
– Consumption as active and creative behaviour/ symbolic focus (McCracken, Featherstone)
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
• Domestication captures the processes of ”taming” of technologies in households integration of action and meaning
• Implies mutual shaping processes technology constructs everyday life and everyday life constructs technology
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
The STS-Trondheim approach
• Domestication can be analysed through three dimensions (Lie and Sørensen 1996, Sørensen et al. 2000): – Practical; The construction of a set of practices related to an
artifact – Symbolic; The construction of meaning of the artifact– Cognitive; Practices related to learning of practice as well as
meaning
• Generic set of features – not only related to the household 07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
My Norweigan example I• 2001: Implementing Ebox - an energy controlling
technology• My focus:
• User pattern
• Motivation
• Design
• Learning
• Energy saving results
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
Ebox
• “Domestication” strategies user categories– “the enthusiast”
– “the sceptic”– “the democratic participant”
• Flexible (i.e. non-standardized and varying) understanding of technologies
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
Example II1998: Energy use and everyday life • An analysis of everyday life and energy use in
Norwegian households• Here domestication was used on a different level
– I did not analyze the domestication of specific technologies (tools), but used domestication as a perspective: a non-deterministic process analysis of practice and meaning
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
Results
• On the basis of information about everyday life routines, discussion about energy and enviromental issues, technological equipment and use, and dwelling type, size and standard, I constructed categories of users which I called ”energy cultures”:
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
Energy cultures• “the self-indulgent” (do not reflect on energy consumption at
all)
• “the soberly indulgent” (no specific awareness for energy but low consumption rates because of socio-economic position)
• “the hesitant environmentalists” (or “the shameful indulgent”, energy-aware but not consuming less energy than the self-indulgent)
• “the environmentalists” (who may not put energy very high on their green agenda)
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
And:• Variations in home construction:
– The home as heaven– The home as project– The home as arena for activity
Why?• Provides a more complex picture of private energy use
(than ”households as economic units” or ”tecnological fixes”)
• Variation in policy instruments towards households…hopefully.
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
Why domestication? Some good reasons: • Technology as part of the analysis and not only as a
frame of social action:– Focus on the practical as well as symbolic dimension of
technology possibilities of change – Technological design empirically ”tested” possibilities of
change– Process focus – user patterns ”in the making” possibilities
of change– Learning strategies possibilities of change
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim
Domestication and sustainability:
• Technological innovation will be part of the solution towards sustainable lifestyles, but there is no such thing as a technoloical fix – We need to involve users in the development of technologies –
they should be easy to operate, have a appealing design and if necessary carry a sustainable message
• Studies of domestication can provide useful knowledge into such processes
07/22/13 2013 IEA workshop, NTNU, Trondheim