2022
Journal Articles
1.
Malanski, Priscila Duarte; de Alencar Schiavi, Sandra Mara; Dedieu, Benoît; Damasceno, Julio Cesar
International research on labor in agri-food value chains: A bibliometric review from web of science Journal Article
In: Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, vol. 6, pp. 852178, 2022.
@article{Malanski2022b,
title = {International research on labor in agri-food value chains: A bibliometric review from web of science},
author = {Priscila Duarte Malanski and Sandra Mara de Alencar Schiavi and Benoît Dedieu and Julio Cesar Damasceno},
url = {https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03833144/document},
doi = {https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.852178},
year = {2022},
date = {2022-09-01},
urldate = {2022-09-01},
journal = {Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems},
volume = {6},
pages = {852178},
abstract = {Value chains are an important driver for the current labor dynamics in the agri-food sector, and agri-food value chain sustainability strongly depends on decent work conditions. An increasing literature body have been investigated the interactions between chain agents and how it impacted labor issues. Our aim was to map the scientific landscape of the scientific knowledge on labor in agri-food value chains. We performed a bibliometric review of 343 articles indexed in the Web of Science based on descriptive and network analysis of articles metadata, which covered authors, journals, citation times, keywords and countries. We showed that labor in agri-food value chains has an international audience, despite that knowledge production was largely built by a restraint leading scientific network. Overall, the scientific knowledge is organized into four main research domains on labor in agri-food value chains: (1) labor governance in global value chains through standards, (2) employment in value chains and impacts on socioeconomic conditions of rural areas, (3) gender issues and value chains, (4) labor and upgrading in global value chains. The controversies in the international literature regarding labor issues in the agri-food value chains, and blind spots of current research are discussed.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Value chains are an important driver for the current labor dynamics in the agri-food sector, and agri-food value chain sustainability strongly depends on decent work conditions. An increasing literature body have been investigated the interactions between chain agents and how it impacted labor issues. Our aim was to map the scientific landscape of the scientific knowledge on labor in agri-food value chains. We performed a bibliometric review of 343 articles indexed in the Web of Science based on descriptive and network analysis of articles metadata, which covered authors, journals, citation times, keywords and countries. We showed that labor in agri-food value chains has an international audience, despite that knowledge production was largely built by a restraint leading scientific network. Overall, the scientific knowledge is organized into four main research domains on labor in agri-food value chains: (1) labor governance in global value chains through standards, (2) employment in value chains and impacts on socioeconomic conditions of rural areas, (3) gender issues and value chains, (4) labor and upgrading in global value chains. The controversies in the international literature regarding labor issues in the agri-food value chains, and blind spots of current research are discussed.
Masters Theses
2.
Kourri, Demetra
A Tunnel of Many Worlds: Unfolding the Blanka Controversy Masters Thesis
University of Manchester, 2022.
@mastersthesis{Kourri2022,
title = {A Tunnel of Many Worlds: Unfolding the Blanka Controversy},
author = {Demetra Kourri},
url = {https://pure.manchester.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/274926081/FULL_TEXT.PDF},
year = {2022},
date = {2022-07-31},
urldate = {2022-07-31},
school = {University of Manchester},
abstract = {This research offers new theoretical and methodological approaches to studying infrastructures in the making, through a pragmatist approach and by mobilising ANT methodology. This making process entails infrastructures as complex networks of things and people and as systems that co-exist and co-evolve with other forms of urban mobility. These systems are not only being built ‘in space’, but as ‘space making’ mechanisms have the potential to shift relations, priorities, and the future of cities. While scholars recognise infrastructures as relational, processual, and constituents of larger heterogeneous networks of actors, the very nature of the space that is produced through their making is yet to be expressed explicitly and/or on multiple scales. More specifically, we are yet to thoroughly theorise how through their conceptualisation and construction, infrastructures extend beyond themselves to shift the very nature of cities that contain them.
This thesis maps the controversy of the Blanka tunnel in Prague, where infrastructure becomes a lens through which we 'read' the city and its constant changes. This helps us explain how a city like Prague negotiates to maintain its historic and cultural character as a 'modern' metropolis. The pragmatic approach and ANT methodology do not see the tunnel as a stable artefact that is influenced purely by political decision-making, financial constraints or technical challenges. We refrain from using predefined explanatory frameworks or panoramic views and employ a series of ‘oligoptica’ (Latour and Hermant 1996) - narrow windows that allow us to see specific aspects of its making in detail.
We map the key actors and concerns of the controversy and see the network of the tunnel unfold, revealing various groups of human and non-human entities. Locating ourselves in specific places of practice, we witness how the tunnel is designed, managed, observed, controlled, discussed, and argued for, and we capture its making through as many voices and actions as possible. We follow the many planning and technical reports, road design manuals, bills of quantities, guidelines and standards, and technical drawings, allowing us to trace how the design and technology of the tunnel inform the re-making of Prague. By documenting the implementation of adopted technical design solutions that respond to the key issues of the controversy, we analyse how the discursive challenges of the project are translated onto its technical/material level and vice versa.
The thesis contributes to conceptual and methodological discussions on the ‘infrastructuring’ of cities, drawing on mobilities, the material turn, STS and ANT. By tracing a live infrastructural project in the making the thesis shows that the making of Blanka is an ‘infrastructuring’ of Prague. This means that the procedures and actions involving its planning and implementation are not just happening in space and time but produce space and time as they transform and question the very nature of the city.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {mastersthesis}
}
This research offers new theoretical and methodological approaches to studying infrastructures in the making, through a pragmatist approach and by mobilising ANT methodology. This making process entails infrastructures as complex networks of things and people and as systems that co-exist and co-evolve with other forms of urban mobility. These systems are not only being built ‘in space’, but as ‘space making’ mechanisms have the potential to shift relations, priorities, and the future of cities. While scholars recognise infrastructures as relational, processual, and constituents of larger heterogeneous networks of actors, the very nature of the space that is produced through their making is yet to be expressed explicitly and/or on multiple scales. More specifically, we are yet to thoroughly theorise how through their conceptualisation and construction, infrastructures extend beyond themselves to shift the very nature of cities that contain them.
This thesis maps the controversy of the Blanka tunnel in Prague, where infrastructure becomes a lens through which we 'read' the city and its constant changes. This helps us explain how a city like Prague negotiates to maintain its historic and cultural character as a 'modern' metropolis. The pragmatic approach and ANT methodology do not see the tunnel as a stable artefact that is influenced purely by political decision-making, financial constraints or technical challenges. We refrain from using predefined explanatory frameworks or panoramic views and employ a series of ‘oligoptica’ (Latour and Hermant 1996) - narrow windows that allow us to see specific aspects of its making in detail.
We map the key actors and concerns of the controversy and see the network of the tunnel unfold, revealing various groups of human and non-human entities. Locating ourselves in specific places of practice, we witness how the tunnel is designed, managed, observed, controlled, discussed, and argued for, and we capture its making through as many voices and actions as possible. We follow the many planning and technical reports, road design manuals, bills of quantities, guidelines and standards, and technical drawings, allowing us to trace how the design and technology of the tunnel inform the re-making of Prague. By documenting the implementation of adopted technical design solutions that respond to the key issues of the controversy, we analyse how the discursive challenges of the project are translated onto its technical/material level and vice versa.
The thesis contributes to conceptual and methodological discussions on the ‘infrastructuring’ of cities, drawing on mobilities, the material turn, STS and ANT. By tracing a live infrastructural project in the making the thesis shows that the making of Blanka is an ‘infrastructuring’ of Prague. This means that the procedures and actions involving its planning and implementation are not just happening in space and time but produce space and time as they transform and question the very nature of the city.
This thesis maps the controversy of the Blanka tunnel in Prague, where infrastructure becomes a lens through which we 'read' the city and its constant changes. This helps us explain how a city like Prague negotiates to maintain its historic and cultural character as a 'modern' metropolis. The pragmatic approach and ANT methodology do not see the tunnel as a stable artefact that is influenced purely by political decision-making, financial constraints or technical challenges. We refrain from using predefined explanatory frameworks or panoramic views and employ a series of ‘oligoptica’ (Latour and Hermant 1996) - narrow windows that allow us to see specific aspects of its making in detail.
We map the key actors and concerns of the controversy and see the network of the tunnel unfold, revealing various groups of human and non-human entities. Locating ourselves in specific places of practice, we witness how the tunnel is designed, managed, observed, controlled, discussed, and argued for, and we capture its making through as many voices and actions as possible. We follow the many planning and technical reports, road design manuals, bills of quantities, guidelines and standards, and technical drawings, allowing us to trace how the design and technology of the tunnel inform the re-making of Prague. By documenting the implementation of adopted technical design solutions that respond to the key issues of the controversy, we analyse how the discursive challenges of the project are translated onto its technical/material level and vice versa.
The thesis contributes to conceptual and methodological discussions on the ‘infrastructuring’ of cities, drawing on mobilities, the material turn, STS and ANT. By tracing a live infrastructural project in the making the thesis shows that the making of Blanka is an ‘infrastructuring’ of Prague. This means that the procedures and actions involving its planning and implementation are not just happening in space and time but produce space and time as they transform and question the very nature of the city.
2021
Journal Articles
3.
Lowans, Christopher; Rio, Dylan Furszyfer Del; Sovacool, Benjamin K.; Rooney, David; Foley, Aoife M.
What is the state of the art in energy and transport poverty metrics? A critical and comprehensive review Journal Article
In: Energy Economics, vol. 101, pp. 105360, 2021, ISSN: 0140-9883.
@article{Lowans2021,
title = {What is the state of the art in energy and transport poverty metrics? A critical and comprehensive review},
author = {Christopher Lowans and Dylan Furszyfer Del Rio and Benjamin K. Sovacool and David Rooney and Aoife M. Foley},
url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988321002668},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105360},
issn = {0140-9883},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-09-01},
urldate = {2021-09-01},
journal = {Energy Economics},
volume = {101},
pages = {105360},
abstract = {This review investigates the state of the art in metrics used in energy (or fuel) and transport poverty with a view to assessing how these overlapping concepts may be unified in their measurement. Our review contributes to ongoing debates over decarbonisation, a politically sensitive and crucial aspect of the energy transition, and one that could exacerbate patterns of inequality or vulnerability. Up to 125 million people across the European Union experience the effects of energy poverty in their daily lives. A more comprehensive understanding of the breadth and depth of these conditions is therefore paramount. This review assessed 1,134 articles and critically analysed a deeper sample of 93. In terms of the use of metrics, we find that multiple indicators are better than any single metric or composite. We find work remains to be conducted in the transport poverty sphere before energy poverty metrics can be fully unified with those of transport poverty, namely the stipulation of travel standards. Without such standards, our ability to unify the metrics of both fields and potentially alleviate both conditions simultaneously is limited. The difficulties in defining necessary travel necessitate the further use of vulnerability lenses and holistic assessments focused on energy and transport services.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This review investigates the state of the art in metrics used in energy (or fuel) and transport poverty with a view to assessing how these overlapping concepts may be unified in their measurement. Our review contributes to ongoing debates over decarbonisation, a politically sensitive and crucial aspect of the energy transition, and one that could exacerbate patterns of inequality or vulnerability. Up to 125 million people across the European Union experience the effects of energy poverty in their daily lives. A more comprehensive understanding of the breadth and depth of these conditions is therefore paramount. This review assessed 1,134 articles and critically analysed a deeper sample of 93. In terms of the use of metrics, we find that multiple indicators are better than any single metric or composite. We find work remains to be conducted in the transport poverty sphere before energy poverty metrics can be fully unified with those of transport poverty, namely the stipulation of travel standards. Without such standards, our ability to unify the metrics of both fields and potentially alleviate both conditions simultaneously is limited. The difficulties in defining necessary travel necessitate the further use of vulnerability lenses and holistic assessments focused on energy and transport services.
2019
Journal Articles
4.
Loconto, Allison; Desquilbet, Marion; Moreau, Théo; Couvet, Denis; Dorin, Bruno
The land sparing – land sharing controversy: Tracing the politics of knowledge Journal Article
In: Land Use Policy, vol. 96, 2019.
@article{Loconto2018,
title = {The land sparing – land sharing controversy: Tracing the politics of knowledge},
author = {Allison Loconto and Marion Desquilbet and Théo Moreau and Denis Couvet and Bruno Dorin},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.09.014},
doi = {10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.09.014},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-01-01},
urldate = {2019-01-01},
journal = {Land Use Policy},
volume = {96},
abstract = {Feeding 9 billion people by 2050 on one hand, and preserving biodiversity on the other hand, are two shared policy goals at the global level. Yet while these goals are clear, they are to some extent in conflict, because agriculture is a major cause of biodiversity loss, and the path to achieve both of them is at the heart of a public controversy around ‘productive’ land use and biodiversity conservation. Over the years, the scientific, policy, civil society and agri-business communities have been engaged in producing evidence that can support a land sparing policy (separating intensive agricultural production from biodiversity conservation) or a land sharing policy (integrating the two in larger and more extensive landscapes). This paper contributes to this debate by analyzing land sparing and land sharing (LSS) as a socio-technical controversy. Through the analysis of large and small corpora of scientific, policy, corporate social responsibility and sustainability standards documents we explore the ethical underpinnings and social networks that support the opposing sides of this controversy. We explore these linkages in order to explain how the concept of land sparing achieved dominance in the scientific literature and how the concept has been taken up in international policy, business and civil society circles. We examine the convergences and divergences in alliances between actors in this controversy in order to map how specific actors have promoted the concept of land sparing as the best way to used land for biodiversity and food production.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Feeding 9 billion people by 2050 on one hand, and preserving biodiversity on the other hand, are two shared policy goals at the global level. Yet while these goals are clear, they are to some extent in conflict, because agriculture is a major cause of biodiversity loss, and the path to achieve both of them is at the heart of a public controversy around ‘productive’ land use and biodiversity conservation. Over the years, the scientific, policy, civil society and agri-business communities have been engaged in producing evidence that can support a land sparing policy (separating intensive agricultural production from biodiversity conservation) or a land sharing policy (integrating the two in larger and more extensive landscapes). This paper contributes to this debate by analyzing land sparing and land sharing (LSS) as a socio-technical controversy. Through the analysis of large and small corpora of scientific, policy, corporate social responsibility and sustainability standards documents we explore the ethical underpinnings and social networks that support the opposing sides of this controversy. We explore these linkages in order to explain how the concept of land sparing achieved dominance in the scientific literature and how the concept has been taken up in international policy, business and civil society circles. We examine the convergences and divergences in alliances between actors in this controversy in order to map how specific actors have promoted the concept of land sparing as the best way to used land for biodiversity and food production.
2018
Proceedings Articles
5.
Brossard, Ludovic; Dourmad, Jean-Yves; Bernard, Emilie
Analyse rétrospective sur 50 ans de publications aux Journées de la Recherche Porcine Proceedings Article
In: 50. Journées de la Recherche Porcine, Paris, France, 2018.
@inproceedings{Brossard2018,
title = {Analyse rétrospective sur 50 ans de publications aux Journées de la Recherche Porcine},
author = {Ludovic Brossard and Jean-Yves Dourmad and Emilie Bernard},
url = {https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02736979
https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02736979/document},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-02-01},
booktitle = {50. Journées de la Recherche Porcine},
address = {Paris, France},
series = {Journées de la Recherche Porcine},
abstract = {Organisées conjointement par l'lfip et l'Inra, les Journées de la Recherche Porcine (JRP) ont été créées en 1969. Leur objectif est de fournir une tribune pour la diffusion rapide et rigoureuse des résultats des recherches en cours auprès des acteurs de la filière porcine. Ce congrès annuel permet aux acteurs de la recherche publique et privée, française, européenne, voire mondiale, de présenter leurs résultats sur des sujets traitant d'économie, santé animale, conduite d'élevage, bien-être animal, alimentation, environnement, logement, reproduction, génétique, qualité des produits, etc. Nous présentons ici une analyse bibliographique fondée sur les titres et les noms des auteurs des publications présentées lors de ces journées de 1969 à 2017. L'objectif est de dresser un panorama des sujets ayant animé la recherche porcine durant ces 50 années, ainsi que des acteurs de cette recherche. Une base de données (corpus) de ces communications a été créée. Ce corpus contient les informations des champs année, titre, session, auteur. L'affiliation est également disponible pour une partie d'entre eux. Cet article illustre l' évolution de ce corpus sur le nombre de communications, leur session, leur type et le nombre d'auteurs. Des outils d'analyse textuelle et de visualisation de réseaux ont été utilisés pour identifier de façon automatique des groupes thématiques. Ils ont été appliqués sur les données des champs titre et auteur du corpus. Entre 1969 et 2017, les JRP ont rassemblé 2 689 publications, avec une moyenne de 55 communications par an. Ces publications se répartissent ainsi : 1 902 textes standards (associées à une communication orale de 10 minutes), 279 synthèses (associées à une communication orale de 20 minutes) et 508 communications affichées (les posters ayant fait leur apparition en 2007). Un réseau de co-publication sur le champ auteur éclaire les liens entre affiliations des auteurs et leurs thématiques principales. Les cartes thématiques des mots du titre mettent en évidence l'évolution des sujets qui ont animé la recherche porcine au cours de ces cinquante dernières années. La variété des sujets, en phase avec les attentes de la filière, et la rigueur scientifique pour les traiter, font des JRP un rendez -vous reconnu, considéré comme une référence en France et en Europe. Les JRP vont continuer à évoluer dans la lignée des précédentes éditions, en veillant à se faire le témoin des attentes et des questionnements de la filière, mais aussi en apportant un éclairage scientifique rigoureux sur les évolutions à venir.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Organisées conjointement par l'lfip et l'Inra, les Journées de la Recherche Porcine (JRP) ont été créées en 1969. Leur objectif est de fournir une tribune pour la diffusion rapide et rigoureuse des résultats des recherches en cours auprès des acteurs de la filière porcine. Ce congrès annuel permet aux acteurs de la recherche publique et privée, française, européenne, voire mondiale, de présenter leurs résultats sur des sujets traitant d'économie, santé animale, conduite d'élevage, bien-être animal, alimentation, environnement, logement, reproduction, génétique, qualité des produits, etc. Nous présentons ici une analyse bibliographique fondée sur les titres et les noms des auteurs des publications présentées lors de ces journées de 1969 à 2017. L'objectif est de dresser un panorama des sujets ayant animé la recherche porcine durant ces 50 années, ainsi que des acteurs de cette recherche. Une base de données (corpus) de ces communications a été créée. Ce corpus contient les informations des champs année, titre, session, auteur. L'affiliation est également disponible pour une partie d'entre eux. Cet article illustre l' évolution de ce corpus sur le nombre de communications, leur session, leur type et le nombre d'auteurs. Des outils d'analyse textuelle et de visualisation de réseaux ont été utilisés pour identifier de façon automatique des groupes thématiques. Ils ont été appliqués sur les données des champs titre et auteur du corpus. Entre 1969 et 2017, les JRP ont rassemblé 2 689 publications, avec une moyenne de 55 communications par an. Ces publications se répartissent ainsi : 1 902 textes standards (associées à une communication orale de 10 minutes), 279 synthèses (associées à une communication orale de 20 minutes) et 508 communications affichées (les posters ayant fait leur apparition en 2007). Un réseau de co-publication sur le champ auteur éclaire les liens entre affiliations des auteurs et leurs thématiques principales. Les cartes thématiques des mots du titre mettent en évidence l'évolution des sujets qui ont animé la recherche porcine au cours de ces cinquante dernières années. La variété des sujets, en phase avec les attentes de la filière, et la rigueur scientifique pour les traiter, font des JRP un rendez -vous reconnu, considéré comme une référence en France et en Europe. Les JRP vont continuer à évoluer dans la lignée des précédentes éditions, en veillant à se faire le témoin des attentes et des questionnements de la filière, mais aussi en apportant un éclairage scientifique rigoureux sur les évolutions à venir.
2015
PhD Theses
6.
Gayoso, Emile
Coproduire le nouveau. Sociologie des plateformes de co-innovation PhD Thesis
2015, (Thèse de doctorat dirigée par Flichy, Patrice Sociologie Paris Est 2015).
@phdthesis{Gayoso2015,
title = {Coproduire le nouveau. Sociologie des plateformes de co-innovation},
author = {Emile Gayoso},
url = {https://www.theses.fr/2015PESC0055},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-12-04},
abstract = {Les plateformes de co-innovation sont des dispositifs en ligne que les entreprises ont commencé à développer au milieu de la décennie 2000, dans le sillage du Web 2.0, afin d’intégrer les consommateurs au processus d’innovation. Présentées comme de nouveaux espaces ouverts et collaboratifs, entièrement dédiés à la coopération avec les internautes, ces démarches participatives suscitent l’engouement des gestionnaires et des cabinets de conseil spécialisés dans l’innovation. Pourtant, rares sont les études portant sur la co-innovation qui aient consacré une enquête de terrain aux dispositifs mis en place et aux formes de collaborations qu’ils accueillent. La sociologie, en particulier, s’est notablement désintéressée — au profit des sciences de gestion — des initiatives de co-innovation impliquant de grandes entreprises et a fait porter l’essentiel de ses analyses sur des cas d’innovation ascendante, sur le mouvement du logiciel libre ou sur de petites structures de nature entrepreneuriale. Cette thèse, en prenant pour objet six plateformes mises en place par des très grandes entreprises françaises et étasunienne dans les secteurs des télécommunications, du transport de voyageurs et du matériel informatique, vise à combler ce manque.Au-delà de cette ambition qui tente de restituer la légitimité d’un objet de recherche au sein d’un champ disciplinaire, cette thèse tisse une réflexion autour de trois problèmes fondamentaux : pourquoi et comment les entreprises associent-elles les usagers à leur processus d’innovation ? Pourquoi et comment les usagers collaborent-ils, le plus souvent de façon bénévole ? De quelles nouvelles formes de collaboration, voire de relation, entre l’individu et l’entreprise ces dispositifs sociotechniques sont-ils porteurs ?Nous apportons des réponses à ces questions en mobilisant les outils combinés de la théorie du cadre de référence de Flichy, de la théorie des régimes d’engagement développée par Thévenot et poursuivie par Auray, et enfin des concepts standards de l’analyse de réseaux. Sur le plan empirique, cette thèse s’appuie sur une enquête de terrain menée depuis 2010 auprès des acteurs de ces plateformes, au cours de laquelle nous avons adopté une méthode quali-quantitative articulant 44 entretiens semi-directifs auprès des acteurs des plateformes (usagers mais aussi responsables de plateformes, chefs de produits, community managers), observations en ligne et analyse de réseaux des collaborations qui se nouent autour des dispositifs.},
note = {Thèse de doctorat dirigée par Flichy, Patrice Sociologie Paris Est 2015},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {phdthesis}
}
Les plateformes de co-innovation sont des dispositifs en ligne que les entreprises ont commencé à développer au milieu de la décennie 2000, dans le sillage du Web 2.0, afin d’intégrer les consommateurs au processus d’innovation. Présentées comme de nouveaux espaces ouverts et collaboratifs, entièrement dédiés à la coopération avec les internautes, ces démarches participatives suscitent l’engouement des gestionnaires et des cabinets de conseil spécialisés dans l’innovation. Pourtant, rares sont les études portant sur la co-innovation qui aient consacré une enquête de terrain aux dispositifs mis en place et aux formes de collaborations qu’ils accueillent. La sociologie, en particulier, s’est notablement désintéressée — au profit des sciences de gestion — des initiatives de co-innovation impliquant de grandes entreprises et a fait porter l’essentiel de ses analyses sur des cas d’innovation ascendante, sur le mouvement du logiciel libre ou sur de petites structures de nature entrepreneuriale. Cette thèse, en prenant pour objet six plateformes mises en place par des très grandes entreprises françaises et étasunienne dans les secteurs des télécommunications, du transport de voyageurs et du matériel informatique, vise à combler ce manque.Au-delà de cette ambition qui tente de restituer la légitimité d’un objet de recherche au sein d’un champ disciplinaire, cette thèse tisse une réflexion autour de trois problèmes fondamentaux : pourquoi et comment les entreprises associent-elles les usagers à leur processus d’innovation ? Pourquoi et comment les usagers collaborent-ils, le plus souvent de façon bénévole ? De quelles nouvelles formes de collaboration, voire de relation, entre l’individu et l’entreprise ces dispositifs sociotechniques sont-ils porteurs ?Nous apportons des réponses à ces questions en mobilisant les outils combinés de la théorie du cadre de référence de Flichy, de la théorie des régimes d’engagement développée par Thévenot et poursuivie par Auray, et enfin des concepts standards de l’analyse de réseaux. Sur le plan empirique, cette thèse s’appuie sur une enquête de terrain menée depuis 2010 auprès des acteurs de ces plateformes, au cours de laquelle nous avons adopté une méthode quali-quantitative articulant 44 entretiens semi-directifs auprès des acteurs des plateformes (usagers mais aussi responsables de plateformes, chefs de produits, community managers), observations en ligne et analyse de réseaux des collaborations qui se nouent autour des dispositifs.
2011
Books
7.
Demortain, David
Scientists and the Regulation of Risk: Standardising Control Book
Edward Elgar Publishing, Incorporated, 2011, ISBN: 9781849809443.
@book{Demortain2011,
title = {Scientists and the Regulation of Risk: Standardising Control},
author = {David Demortain},
url = {https://books.google.fr/books?id=yzHDiMfTtuwC},
isbn = {9781849809443},
year = {2011},
date = {2011-10-01},
urldate = {2011-10-01},
publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing, Incorporated},
abstract = {Risks are increasingly regulated by international standards, and scientists play a key role in standardisation. This fascinating book exposes the action of "invisible colleges" of scientists –loose groups of prominent scientific experts who combine practical experience of risk and control with advisory responsibility – in the formulation of international standards. Drawing upon the domains of medicines, "novel foods" and food hygiene, the author investigates new regulatory concepts emerging from invisible colleges, highlighting how they shape consensus and pave the way for international standards. He explores the relationship between science and regulation from theoretic and historic perspectives, and illustrates how scientific experts integrate regulatory actors in commonly agreed modes of control and structures of regulatory responsibilities. Sociological and political implications are also discussed. Using innovative methodologies and an extensive insight into food and pharmaceutical regulation, this book will provide a much-needed reference tool for scholars and students in a range of fields encompassing science and technology studies, public policy, risk and environmental regulation, and transnational governance.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {book}
}
Risks are increasingly regulated by international standards, and scientists play a key role in standardisation. This fascinating book exposes the action of "invisible colleges" of scientists –loose groups of prominent scientific experts who combine practical experience of risk and control with advisory responsibility – in the formulation of international standards. Drawing upon the domains of medicines, "novel foods" and food hygiene, the author investigates new regulatory concepts emerging from invisible colleges, highlighting how they shape consensus and pave the way for international standards. He explores the relationship between science and regulation from theoretic and historic perspectives, and illustrates how scientific experts integrate regulatory actors in commonly agreed modes of control and structures of regulatory responsibilities. Sociological and political implications are also discussed. Using innovative methodologies and an extensive insight into food and pharmaceutical regulation, this book will provide a much-needed reference tool for scholars and students in a range of fields encompassing science and technology studies, public policy, risk and environmental regulation, and transnational governance.
LIST OF SCIENTIFIC WORKS THAT HAVE USED CORTEXT MANAGER
(Sources: Google Scholar, HAL, Scopus, WOS and search engines)
We are grateful that you have found CorTexT Manager useful. Over the years, you have been more than 890 authors to trust CorTexT for your publicly accessible analyzes. This represents a little less than 10% of CorTexT Manager user’s community. So, thank you!
We seek to understand how the scientific production that used CorText Manager has evolved and to characterise it. You will find here our analysis of this scientific production.
Browse documents by main topics
| What types of documents? |
|---|
| What types of documents? |
| 185 journal articles |
| 41 conference proceedings |
| 27 reports |
| 27 conference (not in proceedings) |
| 26 online articles |
| 24 Ph.D. thesis |
| 17 masters thesis |
| 17 book chapters |
| 6 workshop |
| 5 book |
| 5 miscellaneous |
| Main peer-reviewed journals |
|---|
| Main peer-reviewed journals |
| Scientometrics |
| Réseaux |
| I2D - Information, données & documents |
| PloS one |
| Revue d’anthropologie des connaissances |
| Revue d'anthropologie des connaissances |
| Journal of Rural Studies |
| Energy Economics |
| PODIUM |
| Research Policy |