Toward Nomadological Cyberinfrastructures

  • Jeremy HunsingerEmail author


This article critically analyzes the cyberinfrastructure and e-science policy discourse in the knowledge society. As a work in critical infrastructure studies, I argue that the tendency of cyberinfrastructure and e-science to reify certain misunderstandings of science and knowledge as social and cultural processes misaligns the policy outputs with the policy practices. From this understanding, I argue that we need to consider the development of a nomadological cyberinfrastructure.


Discourse Critical Policy Analysis Cyberinfrastructure E-science 


  1. Atkins, D. E., Droegemeier, K. K., Feldman, S. I., Garcia-Molina, H., Klein, M. L., Messerschmitt, M.L., et al. (2003). Revolutionizing science and engineering through cyberinfrastructure: Report of the National Science Foundation blue-ribbon advisory panel on cyberinfrastructure. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  2. Augé, M. (2004). Oblivion. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bourdieu, P. (2005). The social structures of the economy. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bowker, G. C. (2005). Memory practices in the sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Chompalov, I., Genuth, J., & Shrum, W. (2002). The organization of scientific collaborations. Research Policy, 31(5), 749–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Connolly, W. E. (1993). The terms of political discourse. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cresswell, T. (1997). Imagining the nomad, mobility and the postmodern primitive. In G. Benko & U. Strohmayer (Eds.), Space and social theory: Interpreting modernity and postmodernity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, Incorporated.Google Scholar
  8. DeLanda, M. (2000). A thousand years of nonlinear history (ISBN: 0942299329 ed.). New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
  9. Deleuze, G. (1990). Control and becoming. In Negotiations 1972–1990. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Deleuze, G. (1995). Difference and repetition. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1988). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  12. Dooley, R., Milfeld, K., Guiang, C., Pamidighantam, S., & Allen, G. (2006). From proposal to production: Lessons learned developing the computational chemistry grid cyberinfrastructure. Journal of Grid Computing, 4(2), 195–208.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Finholt, T. A. (2003). Collaboratories as a new form of scientific organization. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 12(1), 5–25.Google Scholar
  14. Gallie, W. B. (1956). Essentially contested concepts. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society.Google Scholar
  15. Graham, S., & Marvin, S. (2001). Splintering urbanism: Networked infrastructures, technological mobilities and the urban condition. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Himanen, P. (2001). The hacker ethic and the spirit of the information age. New York: Random House Inc.Google Scholar
  17. Hunsinger, J. (2005). Toward a internet research. The Information Society, 21(4), 277–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hunsinger, J. (2005). Reflexivity in e-science: Virtual communities and research institutions. ACM Siggroup, 25(2), 38–42.Google Scholar
  19. Jordan, T., & Taylor, P. (1998). A sociology of hackers. The Sociological Review, 46(4), 757–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Mansell, R. (1990). Rethinking the telecommunication infrastructure: The new “black box”. Research Policy, 19, 501–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Masakazu, Y. (1997). “Trust” and “sociable society” – In search of social infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2). Japan Echo, 24, 54–60.Google Scholar
  23. Patton, P. (2000). Deleuze and the political. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ricoeur, P. (2004). Memory, history, forgetting. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  25. Stengers, I. (2000). The invention of modern science (theory out of bounds). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  26. UNESCO. (2005). Towards knowledge societies. Imprimerie Corlet, Condé-sur-Noireau, France: Author.Google Scholar
  27. Welchman, A. (1999). Into the abyss: Deleuze. In S. Glendinning (Ed.), Encyclopedia of continental philosophy. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Wiener, N. (1954). The human use of human beings: Cybernetics and society (da capo paperback) (ISBN: 0306803208 ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Digital Discourse and Culture, Virginia TechBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations