Abstract
Harking back to Langdon Winner's now classic essay “Do artifacts have politics?,” my aim in this article is to ask a very similar question—namely, do artifacts have political economy? Following Winner and with the same objective in mind, I analyze artifacts that: (1) have been designed in ways that embed particular political economies; or (2) are compatible with particular political economies. I illustrate the former using Winner's own example of Robert Moses and the design of bridges in New York City. For the latter, I illustrate a strong and weak version of the compatibility claim, with the strong version characterized by the adoption of both a particular technology and political economy while the weak version is characterized by the adaptation of the social context to a particular technology and political economy. I use the example of advertising technology (“adtech”) and generative artificial intelligence respectively to illustrate these two versions. I frame this discussion within an approach I define as constructivist political economy sitting at the interface of science and technology studies and political economy, which can provide a useful analytical tool to analyze and address the vagaries of contemporary technoscientific capitalism.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Birch, K. (2025). Do Artifacts Have Political Economy? Science Technology and Human Values. https://doi.org/10.1177/01622439251352167
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.