Mapping do-it-yourself science

Federico Ferretti

doi:10.1186/s40504-018-0090-1

Abstract

The emergence of Do-It-Yourself (DIY) science movements is becoming a topic widely discussed in academia and policy, as well as by the general public and the media. While DIY approaches enjoy increasing diffusion even in official research, different social actors frequently talk about them in different ways and circumstances. Interaction and negotiation processes amongst actors (e.g. policy makers and DIY communities) define the premises upon which different conceptualisations of DIY science are deployed.In this paper we offer a framework for analysing the discourse on DIY science.Our study consists of a field research of three spaces active in DIY science premises, two dedicated events of the DIY community, and an auto-ethnography in the field of DIY biology.By relying on the theory of social worlds/arenas (SW/A), we collected data on how notions of DIY science are constructed by different social actors and how conceptual borders are built or are likely to shift, resulting in multiple possible SW/A mappings. We conclude that each and every conceptualisation of DIY science cannot stand independently from the situatedness of its multiple contexts, therefore making its usage in policy making and governance particularly complex.

Highlights

DIY science is gaining a great deal of attention both among practitioners and in the media
Our study consists of a field research of three spaces active in DIY science premises, two dedicated events of the DIY community, and an auto-ethnography in the field of DIY biology
By relying on the theory of social worlds/arenas (SW/A), we collected data on how notions of DIY science are constructed by different social actors and how conceptual borders are built or are likely to shift, resulting in multiple possible SW/A mappings

Summary

Introduction

DIY science is gaining a great deal of attention both among practitioners and in the media. The locations of DIY science are various and range from small groups of tech enthusiasts to large online communities that share scientific objectives and outcomes, organised into local makerspaces, Fablabs, classrooms, universities and museums, public libraries and private enterprises (Nascimento, Guimarães Pereira, & Ghezzi, 2014). Such heterogeneity does result in different ways of practicing DIY science, and in differences in its conceptualization. Our argument is that different social actors articulate discourse about DIY science in fundamentally different ways, pointing us to the existence of multiple understandings and, practical implementations of DIY science. We direct our investigation to the level of social action where individuals share participation and commitment to DIY science, relying on the theory of social worlds/arenas (2019) 15:1

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion