BurtR., (1992), Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
2.
CallonM., (1991), ‘Techno-economic Networks and Irreversibility’, in LawJ., A Sociology of Monsters, (ed.) pp. 132–164, London: Routledge.
3.
CallonM.LawJ., (1997), ‘After Individual in Society: Lessons on Collectivity from Science, Technology and Society’. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 22(2), pp. 165–182.
4.
CallonM.LawJ.RipA. (ed.), (1986), Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology, London: MacMillan.
5.
CassierM., (1995), ‘Les contrats de recherche entre l'université et l'industrie: Les arrangements pour produire des biens privés, des biens collectifs et des biens publics’ (Research contracts between universities and industry: Arrangements for producing private benefits, collective benefits and public benefits). CSI-EMP thesis, Ecole des mines de Paris.
6.
CoaseE.R., (1960), ‘The Problem of Social Costs’. Journal of Law and Economics (3): 1–44.
7.
DuesenberryJ., (1960), ‘Comment on “An economic analysis of fertility”’. In Demographic and economic change in developed countries, ed. The Universities-National Bureau Committee for Economic Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
8.
FriedbergE., (1993), Lepouvoir et la règle. Paris: Le Seuil.
9.
GlaserB.StraussA., (1965), Awareness of Dying. Chicago: Aldine.
10.
GoffmanE., (1961), Encounters: Two Studies in the Sociology of Interaction. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
11.
GoffmanE., (1971), Frame Analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Chicago: Northeastern University Press.
12.
GranovetterM., (1985), ‘Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness’. American Journal of Sociology, 91 (3): 481–510.
13.
HennionA., (1993): La passion musicale. Paris: Métailié.
14.
HesseC., (1990), ‘Enlightenment Epistemology and the Laws of Authorship in Revolutionary France, 1777–1793’. Representations 30 (Spring): 109–137.
15.
LatourB., Science in Action. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
16.
LatourB., (1993), We have never been modern. Essay in symmetrical anthropology. London: Harvester Wheatshead.
17.
LatourB., (1994), ‘Une sociologie sans objet? Remarques sur l'interobjectivité’. Sociologie du Travail (4): 587–608.
18.
MallardA., (1996a), ‘Des instruments à leur usage. Aperçu sur la coordination par la mesure’. In Représenter, Hybrider, Coordonner, Ecole des mines de Paris, edited by MéadelCécileRabeharisoaVololona, 179–187.
19.
MallardA., (1996b), ‘Les instruments dans la coordination de l'action’. Thesis, CSI, Ecole des mines de Paris.
20.
PolanyiK., (1971) [1957], ‘The economy as Instituted Process’, in: Trade and Market in the Early Empires, PolanyiK.ArensbergC.PearsonH. (eds). Chicago: Henry Regnery Co.
21.
RichardsonG.B., (1972), ‘The Organization of Industry’. Economic Journal, (September): 883–896.
22.
StarS.L., (1991), ‘The Sociology of an invisible: The Primacy of Work in the Writings of Anselm Strauss’, in: MainesD. (ed.), Social Organization and Social Processes: Essays in Honour of Anselm L. Strauss, Hawthorme, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
23.
WilliamsonO., (1993), ‘Calculativeness, Trust and Economic Organization’. Journal of Law and Economics XXXVI, (April): 453–486.
24.
WoodmanseeM., (1984), ‘The Genius and the Copyright: Economic and Legal Conditions of the Emergence of the “Author”’. Eighteenth-Century Studies, 17 (4): 425–448.