This article presents a sociological perspective that suggests that technology should be seen as a means for groups to retain or rearrange social relations. Claiming, first, that the sociotechnical systems approach in technology-and-society studies often tend to bring out harmony and cooperation as an ideal and, second, that central social constructivists tend to interpret closure and stabilization processes in terms of consensus, this article, instead, argues that technology should be regarded as the outcome of conflicting interests and ideas. To make the perspective plausible, a number of analytic concepts are put forth and illustrated, some case studies are reinterpreted in conflict language, and a few tentative research hypotheses are formulated.Man's power over Nature often turns out to be a power exerted by some men over other men with Nature as its instrument. (C. S. Lewis)1More than 30 years ago, Jewkes, Sawers, and Stillerman (1958) complained about the inability of social scientists to deal with, or their disinterest in, the origins of technology. Even though this situation has begun to change-most notably with the coming of social constructivism-the general emphasis of social science is still on the consequences of technological development. Studies of scientific and technological controversies are a case in point. They abounded during the last decade, but they were primarily concerned with disputes that emerge in the wake of new technologies AUTHOR'S NOTE: The writing of this article was made possible through a generous fellowship at the Swedish Collegium for Advanced Study in the Social Sciences (SCASSS), Uppsala.In addition to the directors, staff, and fellows of SCASSS, I would also like to thank seminar participants at the Office of History of Technology and Science at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm and at the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies at Gothenburg University (in particular, Olle Hagman, who has drawn my attention to several important anthropological studies), as well as HAkon With

This article addresses two interrelated questions: Why is it often difficult to create better environmental conditions in the world using traditional political processes and new technological fixes? May science and technology studies analyses of user strategies and micropolitics contribute to societies’ treatment of these difficulties? Focusing on the problems that the electric car has confronted in establishing itself as a viable alternative to the internal combustion car, the authors argue that its failure illustrates the poverty of organized politics, on one hand, and the shortcomings of engineering design practices, on the other. The authors suggest that a thoroughgoing change in the automobility system will take place only if more attention is paid to the actual use of alternative vehicles. By driving differently and viewing automobility differently, electric vehicle owners develop “user scripts” that challenge established political and engineering scripts while contributing to what the authors call a “cultural politics of automobility.”

No abstract

This paper tries to contribute to the debates about the nature of technical closure and the character of technical work. The paper focuses on the relationship between world-wide and geographically-limited closure processes and the practical aspects of design. It is based on an analysis of the development of the diesel engine during the 1920s and 1930s. It shows that global closure was reached in diesel engineering on the levels of basic outline, overall goals and developmental trajectories, but also that the design and arrangement of various engine parts remained largely in flux during this period; and it argues that a theoretical perspective that views technology as a local and practical activity - and not only as universal and cognitive - is needed to understand processes of `black-boxing' and stabilization. In support of these claims, a case study from the United States is presented, and a Bourdieuian theory of practice is proposed as a possible approach for technology studies.

No abstract