Have a personal or library account? Click to login
A “Tyranny of Structurelessness”? The Benefits and Burdens of Power Sharing and Governance Models in Citizen Science Cover

A “Tyranny of Structurelessness”? The Benefits and Burdens of Power Sharing and Governance Models in Citizen Science

By: Nicole Foti  
Open Access
|Dec 2022

References

  1. 1Bacon, J. 2012. The Art of Community: Building the New Age of Participation. 2nd ed. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.
  2. 2Berning, J. 2021. The biohackers making insulin 98% cheaper, Freethink, 26 June [online access at https://www.freethink.com/series/just-might-work/how-to-make-insulin last accessed 31 May 2022].
  3. 3Börzel, TA and Risse, T. 2010. Governance without a state: Can it work? Regulation & Governance, 4(2): 113134. DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01076.x
  4. 4Caruso, G. 2013. Justice, equality and conviviality: the World Social Forum’s cosmopolitan vision. Interface: a journal for and about social movements, 5(2): 7897.
  5. 5Caruso, G and Teivainen, T. 2014. Beyond the square: Changing dynamics at the World Social Forum. OpenDemocracy, 7 December [online access at https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/beyond-square-changing-dynamics-at-world-social-forum/ last accessed 6 October 2022].
  6. 6CCL. n.d. Become a member of CCL today. Counter Culture Labs. Available at https://www.counterculturelabs.org/join.html (Last accessed 19 August 2022).
  7. 7Cefalu, WT, Dawes, DE, Gavlak, G, Goldman, D, Herman, WH, Van Nuys, K, Powers, AC, Taylor, SI and Yatvin, AL. 2018. Insulin access and affordability working group: Conclusions and recommendations. Diabetes Care, 41(6): 12991311. DOI: 10.2337/dci18-0019
  8. 8Charmaz, K. 2014. Constructing Grounded Theory. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  9. 9Clarke, AE, Mamo, L, Fosket, J, Fishman, J and Shim, J. (eds.) 2010. Biomedicalization: Technoscience, Health, and Illness in the U.S. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. DOI: 10.2307/j.ctv125jk5c
  10. 10de Lange, O, Youngflesh, C, Ibarra, A, Perez, R and Kaplan, M. 2021. Broadening participation: 21st century opportunities for amateurs in biology research. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 61(6): 22942305. DOI: 10.1093/icb/icab180
  11. 11della Porta, D. 2013. Can Democracy Be Saved? Participation, Deliberation and Social Movements. Cambridge: Polity.
  12. 12DIYbio. 2011. DIYbio Codes. Available at https://diybio.org/codes (Last accessed 19 May 2022).
  13. 13Erikainen, S. 2022. The promissory visions of DIYbio: Reimaging science from the fringe. Science as Culture, 31(3): 287310. DOI: 10.1080/09505431.2022.2028135
  14. 14Fiske, A, Del Savio, L, Prainsack, B and Buyx, A. 2019. Conceptual and ethical considerations for citizen science in biomedicine. In: Heyen, NB, Dickel, S and Brüninghaus, A (eds.), Personal Health Science. Wiesbaden: Springer, pp. 195217. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-658-16428-7_10
  15. 15Foti, N. 2020. Community-based insulin: An urgent response to systemic failures in the U.S. pharmaceutical regime. Othering & Belonging Institute. Available at https://belonging.berkeley.edu/community-based-insulin (Last accessed 10 October 2022).
  16. 16Fragnito, M. 2020. Commoning molecules: Decolonising biological patents by gender hacking protocols. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 21(7): 153169.
  17. 17Freeman, J. 1972. The tyranny of structurelessness. Berkeley Journal of Sociology, 17: 151164.
  18. 18GCBS. 2019. Community Ethics Document 1.0. Global Community Bio Summit. Available at https://www.biosummit.org/ethics (Last accessed 4 August 2022).
  19. 19Göbel, C, Nold, C, Berditchevskaia, A and Haklay, M. 2019. How does citizen science “do” governance? Reflections from the DITOs project. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 4(1): 31. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.204
  20. 20Herkert, D, Vijayakumar, P, Luo, J, Schwartz, J, Rabin, T, DeFilippo, E and Lipska, K. 2019. Cost-related insulin underuse among patients with diabetes. JAMA Internal Medicine, 179(1): 112114. DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.5008
  21. 21Hua, X, Carvalho, N, Tew, M, Huang, ES, Herman, WH and Clarke, P. 2016. Expenditures and prices of antihyperglycemic medications in the United States: 2002–2013. JAMA, 315(13): 14001402. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.0126
  22. 22Ikemoto, LC. 2017. DIY Bio: Hacking life in biotech’s backyard. U.C. Davis Law Review, 51(2): 539568.
  23. 23Juris, JS and Khasnabish, A. 2013. Insurgent Encounters: Transnational Activism, Ethnography, and the Political. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. DOI: 10.1515/9780822395867
  24. 24Keulartz, J and van den Belt, H. 2016. DIY-Bio – economic, epistemological and ethical implications and ambivalences. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 12(7): 119. DOI: 10.1186/s40504-016-0039-1
  25. 25Levi-Faur, D. (ed.) 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199560530.001.0001
  26. 26Murray, AI. 2020. Biologics of resistance: The Open Insulin Project and the promise of antibiocapital. Thesis (PhD), University of California, Santa Cruz.
  27. 27Open Insulin. n.d. Open Insulin Project: Who we are. Open Insulin. Available at https://openinsulin.org/who-we-are/ (Last accessed 22 August 2022).
  28. 28P2PF. n.d. Do-ocracy. P2P Foundation. Available at https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Do-ocracy (Last accessed 27 May 2022).
  29. 29Pauwels, E and Denton, S. 2018. The rise of the new bio-citizen. Wilson Center. 7 February 2018. Available at https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/the-rise-the-new-bio-citizen (Last accessed 1 August 2022).
  30. 30Pear, R. 2019. Lawmakers in both parties vow to rein in insulin costs. New York Times, 11 April [online access at: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/10/us/politics/insulin-prices-legislation.html last accessed 13 May 2019].
  31. 31Pleyers, G. 2010. Alter-globalization: Becoming Actors in a Global Age. Cambridge: Polity.
  32. 32Rasmussen, LM, Guerrini, C, Kuiken, T, Nebeker, C, Pearlman, A, Ware, S, Wexler, A and Zettler, P. 2020. Realizing present and future promise of DIY biology and medicine through a trust architecture. Hastings Center Report, 50(6): 1014. DOI: 10.1002/hast.1194
  33. 33Rigon, A. 2015. Unequal power relations in the governance of the World Social Forum process: an analysis of the practices of the Nairobi Forum. Interface: a journal for and about social movements, 7(2): 7597.
  34. 34Robbins, R. 2016. The insulin market is heading for a shakeup. But patients may not benefit. STAT, 14 October 2016 [online access at https://www.statnews.com/2016/10/14/insulin-prices-generics last accessed 17 May 2019].
  35. 35Russell, AL. 2006. ‘Rough consensus and running code’ and the Internet-OSI standards war. IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, 28(3): 4861. DOI: 10.1109/MAHC.2006.42
  36. 36Sable-Smith, B. 2018. Insulin’s high cost leads to lethal rationing. NPR, 1 September [online access at https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/09/01/641615877/insulins-high-cost-leads-to-lethal-rationing last access 6 October 2022].
  37. 37Scheifele, LZ and Burkett, T. 2016. The first three years of a community lab: Lessons learned and ways forward. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 17(1): 8185. DOI: 10.1128/jmbe.v17i1.1013
  38. 38Shirk, J, Ballard, H, Wilderman, C, Phillips, T, Wiggins, A, Jordan, R, McCallie, E, Minarchek, M, Lewenstein, B, Krasny, M and Bonney, R. 2012. Public participation in scientific research: a framework for deliberate design. Ecology and Society, 17(2): 29. DOI: 10.5751/ES-04705-170229
  39. 39Sunder Rajan, K. 2006. Biocapital: The Constitution of Postgenomic Life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. DOI: 10.1515/9780822388005
  40. 40Talbot, M. 2020. The rogue experimenters. The New Yorker, 25 May. [online access at: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/05/25/the-rogue-experimenters last accessed 6 October 2022].
  41. 41Teivainen, T. 2012. Global democratization without hierarchy or leadership? The World Social Forum in the capitalist world. In: Gill, S (ed.), Global Crises and the Crisis of Global Leadership. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 181198. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139046596.016
  42. 42Trejo, M, Canfield, I, Brooks, W, Pearlman, A and Guerrini, C. 2021. “A cohort of pirate ships”: biomedical citizen scientists’ attitudes toward ethical oversight. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 6(1): 15. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.360
  43. 43Vercammen, A, Park, C, Goddard, R, Lyons-White, J and Knight, A. 2020. A reflection on the fair use of unpaid work in conservation. Conservation & Society, 18(4): 399404. DOI: 10.4103/cs.cs_19_163
  44. 44Walajahi, H. 2019. Engaging the “citizen” in citizen science: Who’s actually included? The American Journal of Bioethics, 19(8): 3133. DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2019.1619868
  45. 45Weber, M. 1930. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Translated by T. Parsons. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
  46. 46Wiggins, A and Wilbanks, J. 2019. The rise of citizen science in health and biomedical research. The American Journal of Bioethics, 19(8): 314. DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2019.1619859
  47. 47Worden, L. 2012. Counterculture, cyberculture, and the Third Culture: Reinventing civilization, then and now. In: Boal, IA, Stone, J, Watts, M and Winslow, C (eds.), West of Eden: communes and utopia in northern California. Oakland, CA: PM Press. pp. 199221.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.528 | Journal eISSN: 2057-4991
Language: English
Submitted on: Jun 1, 2022
Accepted on: Aug 31, 2022
Published on: Dec 15, 2022
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2022 Nicole Foti, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.