A Toolbox for Studying the Global Politics of Science and Technology

  • Maximilian MayerEmail author
  • Mariana Carpes
  • Ruth Knoblich
Part of the Global Power Shift book series (GLOBAL)


The growing preeminence of science and technology in today’s world no longer fits into most existing analytical frameworks. Material elements, technical instruments, and scientific practices are intertwined with basically every aspect of global politics. Nevertheless, the discipline of International Relations (IR) as a whole tends to conceptualize this topic as an exogenous phenomenon. By adopting the notion of techno-politics, we argue that it is neither sufficient to treat sciences and technologies as external to “social” relations, nor as dominating human behavior and determining political outcomes. We propose rather to open up a middle zone in order to study the intersection of science and technology with international and global affairs. Conceptually, the notion of techno-politics involves two broad sets of approaches: interaction and co-production. This introductory chapter presents the chapters of the volume as examples of how the global politics of science and technology might be studied. As a toolbox of methodological insights, the contributions also point towards pathways for future research that enhances the global politics of science and technology as subfield of IR.


Technology Science IR theory Methods Techno-politics Interdisciplinarity 



The authors are thankful to Douglas Howland and Anna Agathangelou for their insightful comments and helpful suggestions that were instrumental for writing this chapter.


  1. Acuto, M., & Curtis, S. (2014). Reassembling international theory: Assemblage thinking and international relations. London: Palgrave Pivot.Google Scholar
  2. Adger, W. N., Eakin, H., & Winkels, A. (2008). Nested and teleconnected vulnerabilities to environmental change. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(3), 150–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adler, E., & Steven, B. (2005). Knowledge in power: The epistemic construction of global governance. In M. Barnett & R. Duvall (Eds.), Power and global governance (pp. 294–318). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Andrejevic, M. (2014). Big data, big questions “The Big Data Divide”. International Journal of Communication, 8.
  5. Anduiza, E., Jensen, M. J., & Jorba, L. (Eds.). (2012). Digital media and political engagement worldwide: A comparative study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Barry, A. (2001). Political machines: Governing a technological society. London: Athlone Press.Google Scholar
  7. Barry, A. (2013). Material politics: Disputes along the pipeline. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bijker, W. E. (1997). Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Boas, T. C. (2004). Weaving the authoritarian web. Current History, 103, 438–443.Google Scholar
  10. Bousquet, A. (2009). The scientific way of war: Order and chaos on the battlefields of modernity. London: Hurst & Company.Google Scholar
  11. Brunstetter, D., & Braun, M. (2011). The implications of drones on the just war tradition. Ethics and International Affairs, 25(3), 337–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Callon, M. (1992). The dynamics of techno-economic networks. In P. Saviotti, R. Coombs, & V. Walsh (Eds.), Technological change and company strategies (pp. 72–102). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  13. Castells, M. (2011). The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society, and culture (Vol. 1). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Connolly, W. E. (2013). The ‘new materialism’ and the fragility of things. Millennium-Journal of International Studies, 41(3), 399–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Costigan, S. J., & Perry, J. (2012). Cyberspaces and global affairs. Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  16. Cox, R. W. (1987). Production, power and world order: Social forces in the making of history. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Deibert, R. J., & Crete-Nishihata, M. (2012). Global governance and the spread of cyberspace controls. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 18(3), 339–61.Google Scholar
  18. Deibert, R. J., & Rohozinski, R. (2010). Risking security: Policies and paradoxes of cyberspace security. International Political Sociology, 4(1), 15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Deibert, R. J., Rohozinski, R., & Crete-Nishihata, M. (2012). Cyclones in cyberspace: Information shaping and denial in the 2008 Russia–Georgia war. Security Dialogue, 43(1), 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Deibert, R., Palfrey, J., Rohozinski, R., & Zittrain, J. (Eds.). (2010). Access controlled: The shaping of power, rights, and rule in cyberspace. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. DeNardis, L. (2014). The global war for Internet governance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Der Derian, J. (2009). Virtuous war: Mapping the military-industrial-media-entertainment-network. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Deudney, D. (2007). Bounding power: Republican security theory from the polis to the global village. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Diamond, L. (2010). Liberation technology. Journal of Democracy, 21(3), 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Drezner, D. W., & Farrell, H. (2004). The power and politics of blogs. Paper presented at the Annual of the American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
  26. Dunn Cavelty, M. (2013). From cyber-bombs to political fallout: Threat representation with an impact in the cyber-security discourse. International Studies Review, 15(1), 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Duvall, R., & Havercroft, J. (2008). Taking sovereignty out of this world: Space weapons and empire of the future. Review of International Studies, 34(4), 755–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Edwards, P. N. (1996). The closed world: Computers and the politics of discourse in Cold War. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  29. Edwards, P. N. (2006). Meteorology as infrastructural globalism. Osiris, 21(1), 229–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Eriksson, J., & Giacomello, G. (2006). The information revolution, security, and international relations: (IR) relevant theory? International Political Science Review, 27(3), 221–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Eriksson, J., & Giacomello, G. (2009). Who controls the internet? Beyond the obstinacy or obsolescence of the State. International Studies Review, 11(1), 205–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Flyverbom, M. (2011). The power of networks: Organizing the global politics of the internet. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Fritsch, S. (2011). Technology and global affairs. International Studies Perspectives, 12(1), 27–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Glaser, C. L. (2003). Structural realism in a more complex world. Review of International Studies, 29(3), 403–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hajer, M. A. (1995). Discourse coalitions and the institutionalization of practice: The case of acid rain in Great Britain. In F. Fischer & J. Forester (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning (pp. 43–67). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Halpin, E. F., Trevorrow, P., Webb, D., & Wright, S. (2006). Cyberwar, netwar and the revolution in military affairs. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hecht, G. (1998). The radiance of France: Nuclear power and national identity after World War II. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  38. Herrera, G. L. (2003). Technology and international systems. Millennium-Journal of International Studies, 32(3), 559–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hussain, M. M., & Howard, P. N. (Eds.). (2013). State power 2.0: Authoritarian entrenchment and political engagement worldwide. Burlington: Ashgat.Google Scholar
  40. Jackson, P. T. (2011). The conduct of inquiry in international relations: Philosophy of science and its implications for the study of world politics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Jasanoff, S. (2004). Ordering knowledge, ordering society. In S. Jasanoff (Ed.), States of knowledge: The co-production of science and social order (pp. 13–45). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Jasanoff, S. (2005a). In the democracies of DNA: Ontological uncertainty and political order in three states. New Genetics and Society, 24(2), 139–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jasanoff, S. (2005b). Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S.-H. (2009). Containing the atom: Sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea. Minerva, 47(2), 119–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1998). Power and interdependence in the information age. Foreign Affairs, 77(5), 81–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Knorr Cetina, K., & Bruegger, U. (2002). Global microstructures: The virtual societies of financial markets. American Journal of Sociology, 107(4), 905–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kremer, J.-F., & Müller, B. (2013). Cyberspace and international relations: Theory, prospects and challenges. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  48. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social-an introduction to actor-network-theory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Linklater, A. (2009). Human interconnectedness. International Relations, 23(3), 481–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Litfin, K. T. (1994). Ozon discourses: Science and politics in global environmental cooperation. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Litfin, K. T. (1999). The status of the statistical state: Satellites and the diffusion of epistemic sovereignty 1. Global Society: Journal of Interdisciplinary International Relations, 13(1), 95–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Litfin, K. T. (2002). Public eyes: Satellite imagery, the globalization of transparency, and new networks of surveillance. In J. N. Rosenau & J. P. Singh (Eds.), Information technologies and global politics: The changing scope of power and governance (pp. 65–88). Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  54. Luke, T. W. (1994). Placing power/siting space: The politics of global and local in the new world order. Environment and Planning D, 12, 613–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. MacKenzie, D. A. (1993). Inventing accuracy: An historical sociology of nuclear missile guidance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  56. Manjikian, M. M. (2010). From global village to virtual battlespace: The colonizing of the internet and the extension of realpolitik. International Studies Quarterly, 54(2), 381–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mann, M. (2008). Infrastructural power revisited. Studies in Comparative International Development, 43(3), 355–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mayer, M. (2012). Exploring China’s rise as knowledge power. In E. Fels, K. Harmat, & J.-F. Kremer (Eds.), Power in the 21st century: International security and international political economy in a changing world (pp. 287–311). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mayer, M., Carpes, M., & Knoblich, R. (2014). The global politics of science and technology: An introduction. In M. Mayer, M. Carpes, & R. Knoblich (Eds.), International relations and the global politics of science and technology (Approaches, concepts, and interdisciplinary conversations, Vol. I). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  60. Miller, C. A. (2004). Climate science and the making of a global political order. In S. Jasanoff (Ed.), States of knowledge: The co-production of science and social order (pp. 46–66). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  61. Mitchell, T. (2002). Rule of experts: Egypt, techno-politics, modernity. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  62. Mowlana, H. (1997). Global information and world communication: New frontiers in international relations. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  63. Mueller, M. L. (2010). Networks and states: The global politics of Internet governance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Mueller, M., & Chango, M. (2008). Disrupting global governance: The Internet whois service, ICANN, and privacy. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 5(3), 303–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Mueller, M., Schmidt, A., & Kuerbis, B. (2013). Internet security and networked governance in international relations. International Studies Review, 15(1), 86–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York: Public Affairs.Google Scholar
  67. Nye, J. S. (2004). Power in the global information age: From realism to globalization. Abingdon, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  68. Oldenziel, R. (2011). Islands: U.S. as networked empire. In G. Hecht (Ed.), Entangled geographies. Empire and technopolitics in the global Cold War (pp. 13–42). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Schipper, F., & Schot, J. (2011). Infrastructural Europeanism, or the project of building Europe on infrastructures: An introduction. History and Technology An International Journal, 27(3), 245–264.Google Scholar
  70. Simmons, B. A. (2013). Preface: International relationships in the information age. International Studies Review, 15(1), 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Singer, P. W. (2009). Wired for war: The robotics revolution and conflict in the twenty-first century. New York: The Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  72. Singh, J. P. (2013). Information technologies, meta‐power, and transformations in global politics. International Studies Review, 15(1), 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Skolnikoff, E. B. (1994). The elusive transformation: Science, technology and the evolution of international politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Strange, S. (1988). State and market. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  75. Stroeken, K. (Ed.). (2013). War, technology, anthropology. New York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  76. Townes, M. (2012). The spread of TCP/IP: How the Internet became the Internet. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 41(1), 43–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Urry, J. (2003). Global complexity. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  78. Wall, T. (2011). Surveillance and violence from afar: The politics of drones and liminal security-scapes. Theoretical Criminology, 15(3), 239–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Warkentin, C., & Mingst, K. (2000). International institutions, the state, and global civil society in the age of the World Wide Web. Global Governance, 6, 237.Google Scholar
  80. Whatmore, S. J. (2009). Mapping knowledge controversies: Science, democracy and the redistribution of expertise. Progress in Human Geography, 33(5), 587–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wight, C. (2006). Agents, structures and international relations: Politics as ontology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Youngs, G. (1999). International relations in a global age: A conceptual challenge. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maximilian Mayer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mariana Carpes
    • 2
  • Ruth Knoblich
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.CGS, University of BonnBonnGermany
  2. 2.GIGAHamburgGermany
  3. 3.IPWSUniversity of BonnBonnGermany
  4. 4.IEE, Ruhr-University BochumBochumGermany

Personalised recommendations