SCIENTIFIC AGENCY AND SOCIAL SCAFFOLDING IN CONTEMPORARY DATA-INTENSIVE BIOLOGY

It is widely recognised that social scaffolding is crucial to the entrenchment of new technologies and related standards and practices in scientific research, as well as to its manifestations and results. At the same time, there is little understanding of the circumstances under which, and the reasons why, some forms of sociality are effective in promoting particular types of scientific work. This chapter explores these questions by focusing on two forms of social scaffolding involved in the development of practices of data dissemination through digital means – and particularly infrastructures such as online databases – within the contemporary life sciences: (1) ontology consortia, which have recently emerged as de facto regulatory bodies for data curation in the US and Europe, and (2) steering committees for model organism communities, which play significant roles in the governance of biological research in the UK. I discuss the successful transformation of these initially ad hoc groups into scientific institutions with political and epistemic visibility and power. Drawing on political theory, I then argue that viewing these organisations as social movements is a fruitful strategy to understand their development from informal gatherings into wellrecognised regulatory bodies, and how this process of institutionalisation builds on highly entrenched forms of group socialisation. This in turn facilitates an analysis of the interrelation between institutional and infrastructural scaffolding involved in the evolution of scientific knowledge-making activities.

[1]  M. Diani,et al.  Social Movements: An Introduction , 1998 .

[2]  Paul Martin,et al.  From Bedside to Bench? Communities of Promise, Translational Research and the Making of Blood Stem Cells , 2008 .

[3]  N. Thrift Environment and Planning D: Society and Space , 1995 .

[4]  Ghislaine M. Lawrence The social construction of technological systems: new directions in the sociology and history of technology , 1989, Medical History.

[5]  Adrian Mackenzie,et al.  More Parts Than Elements: How Databases Multiply , 2012 .

[6]  Kaushik Sunder Rajan,et al.  Biocapital: The Constitution of Postgenomic Life , 2006 .

[7]  Sabina Leonelli,et al.  Data-Centric Biology: A Philosophical Study , 2016 .

[8]  A. Elzinga The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1997 .

[9]  Sabina Leonelli,et al.  Documenting the emergence of bio-ontologies: or, why researching bioinformatics requires HPSSB. , 2010, History and philosophy of the life sciences.

[10]  A. Cambrosio,et al.  Biomedical Conventions and Regulatory Objectivity , 2009 .

[11]  S. Frickel,et al.  A General Theory of Scientific/Intellectual Movements , 2005 .

[12]  B. Strasser,et al.  Collecting, Comparing, and Computing Sequences: The Making of Margaret O. Dayhoff’s Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure, 1954–1965 , 2010, Journal of the history of biology.

[13]  A. Ritter,et al.  Challenging Codes: Collective Action in the Information Age , 1996 .

[14]  Lois Quam,et al.  The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification , 1998 .

[15]  W. Wimsatt,et al.  Articulating Babel: An approach to cultural evolution. , 2013, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[16]  Sabina Leonelli,et al.  Classificatory Theory in Data-intensive Science: The Case of Open Biomedical Ontologies , 2012 .

[17]  Andrew Jamison,et al.  Social Movements: A Cognitive Approach , 1991 .

[18]  L. Caporael The Evolution of Truly Social Cognition: The Core Configurations Model , 1997, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[19]  Graham Cameron,et al.  Beyond the tsunami: developing the infrastructure to deal with life sciences data , 2009, The Fourth Paradigm.

[20]  S. Hilgartner Biomolecular Databases , 1995 .

[21]  S. Jasanoff,et al.  Dreamscapes of Modernity: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power , 2015 .

[22]  Sabina Leonelli,et al.  Bigger, faster, better? Rhetorics and practices of large-scale research in contemporary bioscience , 2013 .

[23]  A. McMeekin,et al.  Public or private economies of knowledge , 2007 .

[24]  Luciano Floridi,et al.  What is the Philosophy of Information , 2002 .

[25]  Jorge L. Contreras,et al.  Bermuda's Legacy: Policy, Patents and the Design of the Genome Commons , 2010 .

[26]  Geoffrey C. Bowker Biodiversity Datadiversity , 2000 .

[27]  Sabina Leonelli Centralising Labels to Distribute Data: The Regulatory Role of Genomic Consortia , 2009 .

[28]  Emanuele Ratti,et al.  Big Data Biology: Between Eliminative Inferences and Exploratory Experiments , 2015, Philosophy of Science.

[29]  S. Leonelli,et al.  Under one leaf: an historical perspective on the UK Plant Science Federation. , 2012, The New phytologist.

[30]  Sidney Tarrow,et al.  Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics , 1994 .

[31]  Sabina Leonelli,et al.  Repertoires: A post-Kuhnian perspective on scientific change and collaborative research. , 2016, Studies in history and philosophy of science.

[32]  Rethinking Science and Values , 2010 .

[33]  Christine Hine,et al.  Databases as Scientific Instruments and Their Role in the Ordering of Scientific Work , 2006 .

[34]  Orkun S. Soyer,et al.  The roles of integration in molecular systems biology. , 2012, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[35]  R. Ankeny,et al.  What’s so special about model organisms? , 2011 .

[36]  Jonathan D. G. Jones,et al.  GARNet, the Genomic Arabidopsis Resource Network. , 2002, Trends in plant science.

[37]  M. Castells The rise of the network society , 1996 .

[38]  Andrew Bartlett,et al.  Inscribing a discipline: tensions in the field of bioinformatics , 2013 .