Negociación sociotécnica: una aproximación teórica desde las prácticas tecnopolíticas

Dafne Calvo; Daniel H. Cabrera Altieri

doi:10.15448/1984-7289.2025.1.46113

Authors

Dafne Calvo University of Valencia (UV), Valencia, Spain https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0659-6792
Daniel H. Cabrera Altieri University of Zaragoza (Unizar), Zaragoza, Spain. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6781-260X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7289.2025.1.46113

Keywords:

Collective action, Social movements, Technological practices, Technological discourses

Abstract

In this article, we theoretically explore the interaction between sociotechnical communities and technology through the lens of negotiation practices. Negotiation is portrayed as a complex process involving conflicts and agreements within social movements. Through a qualitative analysis of sociotechnical communities in Spain, we find that their uses, discourses, and values surrounding technology entail individual, collective, and oppositional issues. We conclude that negotiation within communities is closely linked to the asymmetry of technological appropriation, which necessitates constantly reevaluating the boundaries of their associated practices. Simultaneously, negotiation provides communities greater flexibility and adaptability to the context in which their collective action operates.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Dafne Calvo, University of Valencia (UV), Valencia, Spain

PhD in Communication from the University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain. Postdoctoral researcher at the University of Valencia (UV), Valencia, Spain.

Daniel H. Cabrera Altieri, University of Zaragoza (Unizar), Zaragoza, Spain.

PhD in Communication from the University of Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain. Professor
at the University of Zaragoza (Unizar), Zaragoza, Spain. He was adjunct professor of Contemporary Sociological Theories, National University of Córdoba (UNC), Córdoba, Argentina. He was a full-time researcher at the Institute of Philosophy of the Universidad Veracruzana (UV), Mexico.

References

Ahva, Laura. 2017. Practice theory for journalism studies: operationalizing the concept of practice for the study of participation. Journalism Studies 18 (12): 1523-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2016.1139464. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2016.1139464

Bennett, W. Lance, y Steven Livingston. 2018. The disinformation order: disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European Journal of Communication 33 (2): 122-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323118760317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323118760317

Cabrera, Daniel H. 2006. Lo tecnológico y lo imaginario: las nuevas tecnologías como creencias y esperanzas colectivas. Biblos.

Calvo, Dafne, Ángel Barbas, y Carmen Haro-Barba. 2022. La memoria colectiva del movimiento de cultura libre en España: una exploración del legado cultural y tecnopolítico. Journal of Spanish Cultural Studies 23 (3): 335-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636204.2022.2107817. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14636204.2022.2107817

Calvo, Dafne. 2022. Free software meets Facebook: placing digital platforms’ usage by free culture communities. New media & society 24 (5): 1076-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/146144482097162. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820971629

Candón-Mena, José, y David Montero-Sánchez. 2021. From cyber-activism to technopolitics: a critical take on historical periods and orientations in the use of digital technology by social movements. International Journal of Communication 15: 2921-41. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/1932–8036/20210005.

Castoriadis, Cornelius. 1993. La institución imaginaria de la sociedad. Tusquets.

Chadwick, Andrew. 2013. They hybrid media system. politics and power. Routledge.https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0703993104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199759477.001.0001

Cinnamon, Jonathan. 2020. Attack the data: agency, power, and technopolitics in South African data activism. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 110 (3): 623-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2019.164499. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2019.1644991

Crawford, Kate. 2022. Atlas de la Inteligencia aritficial. Poder, política y costos planetarios. Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Dean, Jodi. 2008. Communicative capitalism: circulation and the foreclosure of politics. En Digial media and democracy, editado por Megan Boler. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/7687.003.0006

Della Porta, Donatella, y Mario Diani. 2011. Los movimientos sociales. Editorial Complutense-CIS.

Dicks, Bella, Bambo Soyinka, y Amanda Coffey. 2006. Multimodal ethnography. Qualitative research 6 (1): 77- 96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106058876. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106058876

Fejerskov, Adam Moe. 2017. The new technopolitics of development and the global south as a laboratory of technological experimentation. Science Technology and Human Values 42 (5): 947-68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243917709934. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243917709934

Jasanoff, Sheila. 2015. Future imperfect: science, technology, and the imaginations of modernity. En Dreamscapes of modernity: sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power, editado por Sheila Jasanoff y Kim Sang-Hyun. The University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2019.0113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2019.0113

Jeppesen, Sandra. 2021. Intersectional technopolitics in social movement and media activism. International Journal of Communication 15: 1961-83.

Juris, Jeffrey S., Michelle Ronayne, Firuzeh Shokooh-Valle, y Robert Wengronowitz. 2012. Negotiating power and difference within the 99%. Social Movement Studies 11 (3-4): 434-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2012.704358. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2012.704358

Kaun, Anne, y Julie Uldam. 2018. Digital activism: after the hype. New Media & Society 20 (6): 2099-2106. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817731924. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817731924

Kelty, Christopher M. 2008. Two bits: the cultural significance of free software. Duke University. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9655.2011.01725_19.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1198vx9

Koopmans, Ruud. 2004. Protest in time and space: the evolution of waves of contention. En The Blackwell companion to social movements, editado por David A. Snow, Sarah A. Soule, y Hanspeter Kriesi. Blackwell.

Kurban, Can, Ismael Peña-López, y Maria Haberer. 2017. What is technopolitics? A conceptual schema for understanding politics in the digital age. IDP Revista de Internet, Derecho y Política 0 (24). https://doi.org/10.7238/idp.v0i24.3061. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7238/idp.v0i24.3061

Margolis, Diana Rothbard. 1985. Redefining the situation: negotiations on the meaning of ‘woman’. Social Problems 32 (4): 332-47. Mattoni, Alice, y Emiliano Treré. 2014. Media practices, mediation processes, and mediatization in the study of social movements. Communication Theory 24 (3): 252-71. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12038. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12038

McCurdy, Patrick, Anna Feigenbaum, y Fabian Frenzel. 2016. Protest camps and repertoires of contention. Social Movement Studies 15 (1): 97-104. https://doi.org/10.16194/j.cnki.31-1059/g4.2011.07.016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2015.1037263

McKersie, Robert B. 2013. A decisive decade. An insider’s view of the Chicago civil rights movement during the 1960s. Southern Illinois University Press.

Melucci, Alberto. 1985. The symbolic challenge of contemporary movements. Social Research 52 (4): 789-816. https://doi.org/10.2307/40970398.

Melucci, Alberto. 1996. Challenging codes: collective action in the information age. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511520891

Mouffe, Chantal. 2000. For an agonistic model of democracy. En Political theory in transition. Routledge.

Renzi, Alessandra, y Ganaele Langlois. 2015. Data activism. En Compromised data. From social media to big data, editado por Greg Elmer, Ganaele Langlois, y Joanna Redden. Bloomsbury. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv4ncp67.8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv4ncp67.8

Rheingold, Howard.2009. Multitudes inteligentes: la próxima revolucion social (smart mobs). Gedisa.

Sádaba, Igor, y Ángel Gordo. 2011. La indolencia tecnopolítica de las ciencias sociales. Viento Sur 117: 76-82.

Smith, Adrian. 2005. The alternative technology movement: an analysis of its framing and negotiation of technology development. Human Ecology Review 12 (2): 106-19.

Swidler, Ann. 2001. What anchors cultural practices. En The practice turn in contemporary theory. Routledge.

Taylor, Charles. 1993. Modern social imaginaries. Duke University.

Taylor, Verta, y Nancy E. Whittier. 1992. Collective identity in social movement communities: lesbian feminist mobilization. En Frontiers in social movement theory, editado por Peter M. Nardi y Beth E. Schneider. Routledge.

Tilly, Charles, y wood, lesley J. 2013. Los movimientos sociales, 1768-2008. Crítica.

Touraine, Alain. 1985. An introduction to the study of social movements. Social Movements 52 (4): 749-87. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315662817-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315662817-6

Treré, Emiliano, y Alejandro Barranquero. 2013. De mitos y sublimes digitales: movimientos sociales y tecnologías de la comunicación desde una perspectiva histórica. Redes 8 (27): 27-47. https://doi.org/10.15213/redes.n8.p27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15213/redes.n8.p27

Valencia Rincón, Juan Carlos, y Claudia Pilar García Corredor. 2014. Movimientos sociales e internet. Editorial Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv893hvf

Van Dijck, Jose. 2016. La cultura de la conectividad. Una historia crítica de las redes sociales. Siglo Veintiuno Editores. Winner, Langdon. 1980. Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus 109 (1): 121-36. https://doi.org/10.2307/20024652.