@incollection{Lippert, author = {Lippert, Ingmar}, title = {Latour's Gaia - Not down to Earth? Social Studies of Environmental Man- agement for Grounded Understandings of the Politics of Human-Nature Relationships}, series = {Interdisziplin{\"a}res Kolleg f{\"u}r Wissenschafts- und Technikforschung: Yearbook ... of the Institute for Advanced Studies on Science, Technology and Society, Teil: 2012}, booktitle = {Interdisziplin{\"a}res Kolleg f{\"u}r Wissenschafts- und Technikforschung: Yearbook ... of the Institute for Advanced Studies on Science, Technology and Society, Teil: 2012}, editor = {Bamm{\´e}, Arno and Getzinger, G{\"u}nter and Berger, Thomas}, publisher = {Profil}, address = {M{\"u}nchen, Wien}, isbn = {978-3-89019-693-0}, doi = {10/bbnb}, pages = {91 -- 111}, language = {en} } @incollection{RaaschLippert, author = {Raasch, Josefine and Lippert, Ingmar}, title = {Verran, Helen}, series = {The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Methods}, booktitle = {The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Methods}, editor = {Atkinson, Paul and Delamont, Sara and Cernat, Alexandru and Sakshaug, Joseph W. and Williams, Richard A.}, publisher = {SAGE Publications}, address = {Los Angeles}, doi = {10/fft6}, abstract = {Helen Verran is a postcolonial historian and philosopher of science at Charles Darwin University in Australia. Her contributions, addressing concepts' performances and effects, are groundbreaking in the study of generalising logics, difference, and ontological politics. This analysis of how concepts get enacted responds to key challenges of social sciences and humanities inquiry.Verran's 'relational empiricism' analyses the many and various practices of conceptualising and their effects. Making relations is a central practice in conceptualising and, thus, part of her analysis. Her approach is relational in that the concepts she analyses are understood as doing something: They relate and separate entities. It is empirical as Verran analyses embodied experiences of worlds/worldings. Central in relational empiricism is the inquiry into tensions and overlaps between concepts as doing differences. Verran is best known for her ethnographic work, particularly on the concept of 'number' (Lippert \& Verran, 2018; Verran, 2001).For Verran, concepts are not merely an intellectual category. Rather, concepts are also embodied and lived, collectively shared and performed in 'repeated routine performances' (Verran, 2001, p. 157). In Verran's material-semiotic analysis, concepts have a realness and are performed or reperformed in situations. This renders concepts as particular in time and place.A world shaped by particular and situated concepts, then, is a world of differences. These differences are not threatening but workable, albeit amid generative dissensus. This take allows possibilities for creating 'futures that are different from the past' (Verran, 2001, p. 35). Verran has developed analytical tools for recognising and doing difference together, for ongoing relating and going-on with others.Before this entry presents three Verranian tools, it locates Verran's work and influences. Then, it introduces and illustrates Verran's key method—storytelling—and presents central tools. The final section addresses politics in Verran's work.}, language = {en} } @incollection{Lippert, author = {Lippert, Ingmar}, title = {In, with and of STS}, series = {Wie forschen mit den "science and technology studies"? : interdisziplin{\"a}re Perspektiven}, booktitle = {Wie forschen mit den "science and technology studies"? : interdisziplin{\"a}re Perspektiven}, editor = {Wiedmann, Astrid and Wagenknecht, Katherin and Goll, Philipp and Wagenknecht, Andreas}, publisher = {Transcript}, address = {Bielefeld}, isbn = {978-3-8376-4379-4}, doi = {10/fdws}, pages = {301 -- 318}, abstract = {How do we narrate about how we 'use' STS for social scientific research? How do we study STS research practices? Do all research practices that involve STS concepts contribute to STS? This text constitutes the afterword to an edited volume that contributes to providing answers in the borderlands of these questions. The af­terword problematises how we perform reflexivity, how we are (not) analysing STS's own research practices, and how we tell simultaneous stories of what STS as a field is or might be. With this problematisation, this essay argues for a praxeography of STS, involving methodographic, conceptographic and cartographic analyses.}, language = {en} } @incollection{Lippert, author = {Lippert, Ingmar}, title = {Limits to Managing the Environment}, series = {Implementing Environmental and Resource Management}, booktitle = {Implementing Environmental and Resource Management}, editor = {Schmidt, Michael and Onyango, Vincent and Palekhov, Dmitry}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Heidelberg}, isbn = {978-3-540-77568-3}, pages = {209 -- 210}, abstract = {This part investigates some of the limits and contradictions of management of the environment and its resources, through detailed discussions of key dimensions of applied environmental management. This part introduces studies of 1) resource management (rivers as well as recycling), 2) specific techniques drawn on in corporate and public environmental management (suggestion schemes, and respectively, visualisation techniques), and finally, 3) policy discourses (Clean Development Mechanism). The studies presented here are linked by a common thread which recognises that the historicity of environmental management as a social practice requires us to scrutinise its specificity as a practical, social, cultural as well as political achievement. The ascension of science and modernity gave rise to a qualitative change in cultural conceptualisations of the human-nature relationship: nature became an object to be 'managed' by so-called experts. By now, however, environmental management has come under critique in that what it proposes as solutions may simultaneously comprise the causes of environmental problems. First, the means used by environmental management can be identified as instances of modernism, industrialism as well as capitalism. Second, scholars of environmental problems criticise the 'instruments' of environmental 'management' for reproducing the problems, rather than solving them. To examine how environmental problems ought to be approached a critical stance is now seen as essential. Necessarily then, do issues of ideology, epistemology and theory crop up.}, language = {en} } @misc{Lippert, author = {Lippert, Ingmar}, title = {Umwelt - "Version 2b": Das Programmieren {\"o}kologischer Fehlentscheidungen und Grundlagen f{\"u}r eine neue Umweltpolitik}, series = {Leviathan}, volume = {44}, journal = {Leviathan}, number = {3}, issn = {0340-0425}, doi = {10.5771/0340-0425-2016-3-399}, pages = {399 -- 427}, abstract = {Herrschende Umweltpolitik will evidenzbasiert sein, will Umweltfakten nutzen. Auf Grundlage einer Ethnografie der Produktion betrieblicher CO2-Fußabdr{\"u}cke werden Umweltfakten als Effekt von Arbeit und Datenverarbeitung analysiert. Arbeitspraktisch existiert Umwelt in einem hybriden und taktischen Datenraum. Daraus ergeben sich umweltpolitische Implikationen, die sowohl die Pr{\"a}missen {\"o}kologischer Modernisierung wie auch staatlicher Umweltkontrolle infrage stellen.}, language = {de} } @misc{SimonsLisLippert, author = {Simons, Arno and Lis, Aleksandra and Lippert, Ingmar}, title = {The political duality of scale-making in environmental markets}, series = {Environmental Politics}, volume = {23}, journal = {Environmental Politics}, number = {4}, issn = {1743-8934}, doi = {10.1080/09644016.2014.893120}, pages = {632 -- 649}, abstract = {New markets are key in debates concerning environmental regimes. Critics and proponents share a discourse that characterises environmental markets in terms of scale; many discuss how to scale environmental markets 'the right way'. Building on previous work in human geography, actor-network theory, and governmentality studies, we unpack the dual but always interwoven politics of scale-making in doing environmental policies, which consists of material-semiotic practices of producing and using scales as ontologically real ordering devices. Drawing from the results of three studies conducted independently by the authors, we analyse material-semiotic scale-making practices in different ways of enacting environmental markets. By revealing the dual politics of scale production and use in environmental markets, our analysis contributes to the study of developing and implementing environmental governance.}, language = {en} } @incollection{Lippert, author = {Lippert, Ingmar}, title = {Corporate carbon footprinting as techno-political practice}, series = {The Carbon Fix: Forest Carbon, Social Justice, and Environmental Governance}, booktitle = {The Carbon Fix: Forest Carbon, Social Justice, and Environmental Governance}, editor = {Paladino, Stephanie and Fiske, Shirley J.}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {London}, isbn = {9781611323337}, pages = {107 -- 118}, abstract = {Attempting to tackle climate change with market solutions hinges on the existence of emissions. We know much about the politics of undoing emissions - via offsets. But where do emissions come from? How are they done? Carbon footprinting seems to be the simple answer. Is this merely a 'technical' matter? I explore how emissions come into being; carbon accounting emerges as techno-political practice, fraught with non-transparency. This chapter argues that 'successful' corporate carbon accounting practices efficiently and skilfully ignore significant political implications of the company's practical relation to climate change. 'Successful' in this case signifies what matters for the company to compete well in capitalist markets. By examining voluntary carbon accounting at a financial services corporation, I invite an engagement with how the technicality and politics of carbon interrelate in accounting. I ground my analysis in ethnographic fieldwork across 20 months in the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) unit at one of the 50 largest companies globally. Over this period, I supported the CSR unit's management of their sustainability data, in exchange for overt and explicit research access to the CSR unit's activities.}, language = {en} } @incollection{WolfLippert, author = {Wolf, Stephan and Lippert, Ingmar}, title = {Hochschulen auf dem Weg zur Nachhaltigkeit: M{\"o}glichkeiten studentischer Partizipation in Umweltmanagementsystemen}, series = {Umweltmanagement an Hochschulen: Nachhaltigkeitsperspektiven}, booktitle = {Umweltmanagement an Hochschulen: Nachhaltigkeitsperspektiven}, editor = {Leal Filho, Walter and Delakowitz, Bernd}, publisher = {Peter Lang}, address = {Frankfurt am Main}, isbn = {978-3-631-52956-0}, pages = {143 -- 162}, abstract = {Wir entwickeln eine kritische studentische Perspektive auf Nachhaltigkeitspolitik an Hochschulen. Dabei betrachten wir den reduzierenden Fokus hochschulischer Nachhaltigkeistarbeit auf Umweltmanagementsysteme im Verh{\"a}ltnis auf die Potentiale der Hinterfragung von Lehre und Forschung aus der Perspektive des Nachhaltigkeitsdiskurses. F{\"u}r einen Prozess der nachhaltigen Hochschulentwicklung erscheint als wesentlich, Studium, hochschulpolitische Engagementm{\"o}glichkeiten sowie Forschung selbst zum Objekt von Nachhaltigkeitsdiskussionen in den Vordergrund zu stellen.}, language = {de} } @misc{LippertMewes, author = {Lippert, Ingmar and Mewes, Julie Sascia}, title = {Data, Methods and Writing: Methodographies of STS Ethnographic Collaboration in Practice}, series = {Science \& Technology Studies}, volume = {34}, journal = {Science \& Technology Studies}, number = {3}, issn = {2243-4690}, doi = {10.23987/sts.110597}, pages = {2 -- 16}, abstract = {Methods have been recognised in STS as mattering for a long time. STS ethnographies establish a boundary object with which STS scholars weave a pattern: From such ethnographic accounts we learn that knowledge is produced locally. Ethnography has over the recent decades been highlighted as a key method in STS. And that STS ethnography is specifically shaped by being often configured to consider its forms of collaboration or intervention in the field. This special issue focuses on how methods matter, specifically on how STS ethnographic collaboration and its data are translated into ethnographic writing, or performative of other reality effects. Exploring STS's own methods-in-action brings to attention the messy landscape of method practice. Our objective in this exploration is to develop a genre of writing about method that fosters response-ability and enables the audience of research output to position themselves between the research materials and practices that were invested into the study. This special issue hopes to contribute to STS engagement with its methods by way of methodography. Methodography serves as a genre of analytic writing, that articulates specificity and scrutinises the situated practices of producing STS knowledge.}, language = {en} } @incollection{Lippert, author = {Lippert, Ingmar}, title = {Digitalisation as promissory infrastructure for sustainability}, series = {Handbook of Critical Environmental Politics}, booktitle = {Handbook of Critical Environmental Politics}, editor = {Pellizzioni, Luigi and Leonardi, Emanuele and Asara, Viviana}, publisher = {Edward Elgar}, address = {Cheltenham}, isbn = {978-1-83910-066-6}, doi = {10.4337/9781839100673.00049}, pages = {540 -- 553}, abstract = {Supposedly, digitalisation offers new capacities and directions for environmental politics and governance. This chapter critically introduces the discursive trajectories of three 'developments', sustainable development, digitalisation and capitalist acceleration. Analytically, I approach these trajectories with the sociology of promises, environmental sociology and science and technology studies. To illustrate how subjects and environments are differently (con)figured at the intersection of these trajectories, I attend to two contexts and ask for each how subjects and environments are (con)figured. The contexts are global discourses and local dispositifs of smart cities and of carbon accounting/datafication. The chapter concludes in terms of digitalisation as promissory infrastructural relations that cut across these contexts. This raises avenues for critical environmental politics studies that are sensitive to discourses and dispositifs of greening in relation to recent innovations in analytics that recognise both epistemic/epistemological and ontic/ontological politics. With such attention, interesting problematisations and questions about transformative and conservative potentials emerge.}, language = {en} }