Abstract
There is renewed and increasing interest in understanding the part that infrastructures play in societal transformations, especially in response to the various challenges of climate change. Studies that focus on these issues tend to examine infrastructures in isolation from each other, and tend to work with evolutionary accounts of incremental change punctuated by short periods of radical innovation. This paper questions both these abstractions. Using four empirical cases, it directs attention to intersections between infrastructures at specific times and places, highlighting the dynamic qualities of infrastructures-in-use, and conceptualising societal transformations as outcomes of these intersections. Four forms of intersection are elaborated – co-constitution, adaptation and threading through, historical layering, and coexisting configurations. Instances of each are used to illustrate some of complex and often ambiguous processes through which infrastructures interact. The paper ends by outlining implications for future research and for interventions by policy-makers and others seeking to influence the ways in which infrastructures intersect.
Highlights
Following Star's (1999) call for greater attention to the ‘boring thing’ of infrastructure, an infrastructural turn (Amin, 2014) has unfolded across the social sciences
The first is adherence to a model of change in which long periods of gradual or incremental evolution are punctuated by shorter periods of fundamental or radical change, linked to a privileging of developmentalist accounts in which systems and infrastructures are thought to progress through generic steps and stages
We suggest that would-be interveners, amongst others, should engage in permanently reflexive forms of governance regarding the dynamic relations between infrastructures and practices rather than understanding their role as that of helping networks and systems move from one ‘phase’ or stage of development to the
Summary
Following Star's (1999) call for greater attention to the ‘boring thing’ of infrastructure, an infrastructural turn (Amin, 2014) has unfolded across the social sciences. One method of discovering whether and how understanding is limited by the enacted simplifications is to experiment with different concepts and models This generates alternative forms of knowledge and can produce different insights for policymaking and governance. Taking heed of Star and Ruheleder's (1996) definition, we offer situated and nuanced accounts of how infrastructural relations develop and change in concert with each other and with social practices and institutions. This approach generates alternative interpretations of infrastructural evolution. We suggest that would-be interveners, amongst others, should engage in permanently reflexive forms of governance regarding the dynamic relations between infrastructures and practices rather than understanding their role as that of helping networks and systems move from one ‘phase’ or stage of development to the
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
