The cartography of controversies is a set of techniques to explore and visualize issues. It was developed by Bruno Latour as a didactic version of Actor-Network Theory to train college students in the investigation of contemporary socio-technical debate. The scope and interest of such cartography, however, exceed its didactic origin. Adopted and developed in several universities in Europe and the US, the cartography of controversies is today a full research method, though, unfortunately, not a much documented one. To fill this lack of documentation, we draw on our experience as Latour’s teaching assistant, to introduce some of the main techniques of the social cartographer toolkit. In particular, in these pages we will focus on exploration, leaving the discussion of visualization tools to a further paper.
Bloor, D. ( 1991) Knowledge and Social Imagery. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
2.
Callon, M. ( 1981) "Pour une sociologie des controverses technologiques ," Fundamenta Scientae2: 381-99.
3.
Callon, M. ( 1986) "Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay," in J. Law (ed.) Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge?, pp. 196-223. London: Routledge.
4.
Callon, M. ( 1989) "Society in the Making: The Study of Technology as a Tool for Sociological Analysis," in W. E. Bijker , T. P. Hughes and T. Pinch (eds) The Social Construction of Technological Systems, pp. 83-103. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5.
Callon, M. and Rip, A. ( 1992) "Humains, non-humains: morale d’une coexistence ," in J. Theys and B. Kalaoram (eds) La Terre Outragée. Les Experts sont Formel!, pp. 140-56. Paris: Autrement.
6.
Collins, H. and Pinch, T. ( 1993) The Golem: What Everyone Should Know about Science . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
Collins, H. and Pinch, T. ( 1998) The Golem at Large: What You Should Know about Technology . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Ghitalla, F., Jacomy, M. and Pfaender, F. ( 2006) "Détection et visualisation d’agrégats de documents web. L’exemple du domaine thématique de la Culture Scientifique, Technique et Industrielle." URL: www.webatlas.fr/ressources/agregatCSTI.pdf (accessed July 2008).
9.
Hilborn, R.C. ( 2004) "Sea Gulls, Butterflies, and Grasshoppers: A Brief History of the Butterfly Effect in Nonlinear Dynamics," American Journal of Physics72(4): 425-7.
10.
Latouche, S. ( 2004) Survivre au développement. Paris: Editions mille et une nuits.
11.
Latour, B. ( 1999a) Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12.
Latour, B. ( 1999b) "On Recalling ANT," in J. Law and J. Hassard (eds) Actor Network Theory and After, pp. 15-25. Oxford: Blackwell.
13.
Latour, B. ( 2004a) "On Using ANT for Studying Information Systems: A (Somewhat) Socratic Dialogue," in C. Avgerou , C. Ciborra and F. F. Land (eds) The Social Study of Information and Communication Study, pp. 62-76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14.
Latour, B. ( 2004b) "How to Talk about the Body? The Normative Dimension of Science Studies," Body & Society10(2-3): 205-29.
15.
Latour, B. ( 2004c) "Whose Cosmos, Which Cosmopolitics? Comments on the Peace Terms of Ulrich Beck," Common Knowledge10(3): 450-62.
16.
Latour, B. ( 2004d) Politics of Nature. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.
17.
Latour, B. ( 2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory . Oxford: Oxford University Press .
18.
Law, J. ( 1989) "Technology and Heterogeneous Engineering: The Case of Portuguese Expansion," in W. E. Bijker , T. P. Hughes and T. Pinch (eds) The Social Construction of Technological Systems, pp. 111-34. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19.
Law, J. ( 2004) After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. London and New York: Routledge .
20.
Law, J. and Hassard, J., eds (1999) Actor Network Theory and After . Oxford: Blackwell.
21.
Leydesdorff, L. ( 2001) The Challenge of Scientometrics: The Development, Measurement, and Self-Organization of Scientific Communications. Boca Raton, FL: Universal Publishers.
22.
Leydesdorff, L. and Hellsten, I. ( 2006) "Measuring the Meaning of Words in Contexts: An Automated Analysis of Controversies about Monarch Butterflies, Frankenfoods, and Stem Cells,"Scientometrics67(2): 231-58.
McInerney, C., Bird, N. and Nucci, M. ( 2004) "The Flow of Scientific Knowledge from Lab to the Lay Public: The Case of Genetically Modified Food," Science Communication26: 44-74.
25.
Macospol (2007) Consortium Agreement Annex I, p. 6. Unpublished document submitted to the European Union, 5 November .
26.
Marres, N. and Rogers, R. ( 2005) "Recipe for Tracing the Fate of Issues and their Publics on the Web," in B. Latour and P. Weibel (eds) Making Things Public, pp. 922-35. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27.
Pew Initiative ( 2003) Three Years Later: Genetically Engineered Corn and the Monarch Butterfly Controversy. Washington: Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. URL: http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/www.pewtrustsorg/Reports/Food_and_Biotechnology/vf_biotech_monarch.pdf (accessed July 2008).
28.
Pinch, T. and Leuenberger, C. ( 2006) "Researching Scientific Controversies: The S&TS Perspective ," in Proceedings of EASTS Conference "Science Controversy and Democracy," National Taiwan University , Taiwan, 3-5 August.
29.
Stengers, I. ( 2000) The Invention of Modern Science. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press.
30.
Venturini, T. ( 2006) "Opera Aperta: Wikipedia e l’oralità secondaria ," Magma4(1), URL: http://www.analisiqualitativa.com/magma/0401/articolo_06.htm (accessed July 2008).
31.
Venturini, T. ( 2008) "Terminator contro terminator (ovvero della modernizzazione tecnologica in agricoltura)," in G. Bella and D. Diamantini (eds) Studiare la Società dell’Informazione, pp. 183-207. Milano : Guerini e Associati.
32.
Wynne, B. ( 1992) "Misunderstood Misunderstandings: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science," Public Understanding of Science1(3): 281-304.
