Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Technik, Digitalisierung und internationale Politik

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbuch Internationale Beziehungen

  • 304 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Dieses Kapitel stellt zentrale Themen der Technologieforschung in den Internationalen Beziehungen vor. Zunächst werden einschlägige theoretische und methodologische Positionen der Technikforschung erläutert. Im Hauptteil des Kapitels werden anschließend zwei empirische Felder ausführlicher behandelt: Internet Governance und Sicherheitsforschung. Es zeigt sich, dass Phänomene wie maschinelles Lernen, soziale Netzwerke und Überwachung politische Praktiken grundlegend verändern.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Digitalität bezieht sich auf das Speichern und Senden von Daten in einer binären Kodierung. Ein zweiter ‚neuartiger‘ Aspekt ist die Vernetzung: Der vernetzte, dezentrale Charakter bedeutet eine große politische Herausforderung, wie in den Abschnitten 2 und 3 erläutert wird.

  2. 2.

    Selbstverständlich sind auch hier die Fragen nach den Grenzen der IB offen. Nicht jede Autorin, die ich zitiere, wird sich als Politikwissenschaftlerin verstehen. Fragen, die grob zu IG gehören, werden in verschiedenen Disziplinen verhandelt und gleichzeitig bildet sich IG als eigenes Forschungsfeld heraus.

  3. 3.

    Dies liegt daran, dass beispielsweise Ebay eine starke Verschlüsselung braucht, um Zahlungsvorgänge zu sichern. Daher waren in diesem Fall die Interessen der Aktivisten hinsichtlich Privatsphäre und die der Unternehmen ähnlich.

  4. 4.

    Bei dem Einsatz von Ransomware werden Daten auf Endgeräten verschlüsselt und erst durch das Zahlen eines Lösegelds (ransom) wieder entschlüsselt. Diese Art des Betrugs hat schon weltweit Unternehmen und staatliche Organisationen wie die Deutsche Bahn oder die britische NHS betroffen.

  5. 5.

    Doxing oder auch Doxxing bezeichnet das Sammeln und spätere Publizieren persönlicher Daten, um die betreffende Person öffentlich bloßzustellen. Teilwiese geschieht dies mit politischen Untertönen, beispielsweise bei Anonymous, aber es kann sich auch um private Erpressung handeln.

  6. 6.

    Die gesammelten Daten werden sowohl für kommerzielle als auch Sicherheitszwecke gesammelt. Aus Platzgründen kann dieser Prozess hier nicht näher behandelt werden. Der Text von Bellanova und Duez (2012) geht darauf jedoch im Detail ein.

  7. 7.

    Es zeigt sich auch in diesem Feld eine vermehrte Nutzung qualitativer Methoden und STS-Ansätzen. Dies ermöglicht es, die Effekte des PNR Systems auf den Endnutzer zu zeigen und kritisch zu hinterfragen.

Literatur

  • Allcott, Hunt, und Matthew Gentzkow. 2017. Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. http://www.nber.org/papers/w23089.pdf. Zugegriffen am 14.02.2017.

  • Amoore, Louise. 2011. Data derivatives: On the emergence of a security risk calculus for our times. Theory, Culture & Society 28:24–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amoore, Louise. 2013. The politics of possibility: Risk and security beyond probability. Durham/London: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Amoore, Louise, und Marieke De Goede. 2005. Governance, risk and dataveillance in the war on terror. Crime, Law and Social Change 43:149–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Warwick, und Vincanne Adams. 2007. Pramoedya’s chickens: Postcolonial studies of technoscience. In The handbook of science and technology studies, Hrsg. Edward J. Hackett et al., 181–204. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aradau, Claudia. 2010. Security that matters: Critical infrastructure and objects of protection. Security Dialogue 41:491–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aradau, Claudia, Jef Huysmans, Andrew Neal, und Nadine Voelkner, Hrsg. 2015. Critical Security Methods: New Frameworks for Analysis. The New International Relations Studies. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aradau, Claudia, und Tobias Blanke. 2018. Governing others: Anomaly and the algorithmic subject of security. European Journal of International Security 3:1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arora, Payal. 2019. Decolonizing privacy studies. Television & New Media 20:366–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arquilla, John, und David Ronfeldt. 2001. Networks and Netwars: The Future of Terror, Crime, and Militancy. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, Vian, und Andrew McStay. 2018. Fake news and the economy of emotions: Problems, causes, solutions. Digital Journalism 6:154–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, James, Julian Borger, und Glenn Greenwald. 2013. Revealed: How US and UK spy agencies defeat internet privacy and security. The Guardian, September 6. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/05/nsa-gchq-encryption-codes-security. Zugegriffen am 28.05.2017.

  • Balzacq, Thierry, und Myriam Dunn Cavelty. 2016. A theory of actor-network for cyber-security. European Journal of International Security 1:176–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barad, Karen. 1998. Getting real: Technoscientific practices and the materialization of reality. Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 10:87–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barlow, John Perry. 1996. A declaration of the independence of cyberspace. In Crypto anarchy, cyberstates, and pirate utopias, 27–30. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, Andrew, und William Walters. 2003. From EURATOM to „complex systems“: Technology and European government. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 28:305–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauman, Zygmunt, et al. 2014. After snowden: Rethinking the impact of surveillance. International Political Sociology 8:121–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellanova, Rocco, und Denis Duez (2012) A Different View on the ‚Making‘ of European Security: The EU Passenger Name Record System as a Socio-Technical Assemblage. European Foreign Affairs Review 17(2): 109–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellanova, Rocco. 2017. Digital, politics, and algorithms: Governing digital data through the lens of data protection. European Journal of Social Theory 20:329–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellanova, Rocco, Katja Lindskov Jacobsen, und Linda Monsees. 2020. Taking the trouble: Science, technology and security studies. Critical Studies on Security 8:87–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, Colin J. 2011. In defense of privacy: The concept and the regime. Surveillance & Society 8:485–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bigo, Didier. 2012. Security, surveillance and democracy. In Routledge handbook of surveillance studies, Hrsg. Kirstie Ball, Kevin D. Haggerty, und David Lyon, 277–284. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bijker, Wiebe E. 2010. How is technology made? That is the question! Cambridge Journal of Economics 34:63–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodó, Balázs, Kristina Irion, Heleen Janssen, und Alexandra Giannopoulou. 2021. Personal data ordering in context: The interaction of meso-level data governance regimes with macro frameworks. Internet Policy Review 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bueger, Christian, und Frank Gadinger. 2015. ‚The Play of International Practice‘. International Studies Quarterly May, 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bueger, Christian, und Tobias Liebetrau. 2021. Protecting hidden infrastructure: The security politics of the global submarine data cable network. Contemporary Security Policy 42:391–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Čas, Johann, Bellanova Rocco, J. Peter Burgess, Michael Friedewald, und Walter Peissl. 2017. Introduction surveillance, privacy and security. In Surveillance, privacy and security citizens’ perspectives, Hrsg. Friedewald Michael, J. Peter Burgess, Rocco Bellanova, und Johann Cas, 1–12. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceyhan, Ayse. 2002. Technologization of security: Management of uncertainty and risk in the age of biometrics. Surveillance & Society 5:102–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chenou, Jean-Marie, und Roxana Radu. 2017. The „right to be forgotten“: Negotiating public and private ordering in the European Union. Business & Society 58:74–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Julie E. 2007. Cyberspace as/and space. Columbia Law Review 107:210–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, E. Gabriella. 2014. Hacker, hoaxer, whistleblower, spy: The many faces of Anonymous. London/New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coole, Diana H., und Samantha Frost, Hrsg. 2010. New materialisms: Ontology, agency, and politics. Durham/London: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couldry, Nick, und Ulises A. Mejias. 2019. Data colonialism: Rethinking big data’s relation to the contemporary subject. Television & New Media 20:336–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creech, Brian. 2020. Fake news and the discursive construction of technology companies’ social power. Media, Culture & Society 42:952–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgren, Peter. 2005. The internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication 22:147–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, Jan, und Jakub Eberle. 2018. Hybrid warriors: Transforming Czech security through the ‚Russian hybrid warfare‘ assemblage. Czech Sociological Review 54:907–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, Jan, und Jakub Eberle. 2021. Speaking of hybrid warfare: Multiple narratives and differing expertise in the ‚hybrid warfare‘ debate in Czechia. Cooperation and Conflict 56(4): 432–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, Simon G. 1998. Re-engineering the right to privacy: How privacy has been transformed from a right to a commodity. In Technology and privacy: The new landscape, Hrsg. Philip Agre und Marc Rotenberg, 143–166. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeNardis, Dr. Laura, und Mark Raymond. 2013. Thinking clearly about multistakeholder internet governance. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2354377.

  • DeNardis, Laura, Derrick Cogburn, Nanette S. Levinson, und Francesca Musiani, Hrsg. 2020. Introduction: Internet governance as an object of research inquiry. In Researching internet governance: Methods, frameworks, futures, 1–20. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denning, Dorothy E. 1996. The future of cryptography. In Crypto anarchy, cyberstates, and pirate utopias, 85–101. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diffie, Whitfield, und Susan Eva Landau. 1998. Privacy on the line the politics of wiretapping and encryption. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Drezner, Daniel W. 2009. Weighing the scales: The Internet’s effect on state-society relations. Brown Journal of World Affairs 16:31–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn Cavelty, Myriam. 2007. Cyber-security and threat politics: US efforts to secure the information age. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn Cavelty, Myriam, und Andreas Wenger. 2020. Cyber security meets security politics: Complex technology, fragmented politics, and networked science. Contemporary Security Policy 41:5–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutsyk, Diana, und Marta Dyczok. 2020. Ukraine’s new media laws: Fighting disinformation or targeting freedom of speech? Wilson Center. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/ukraines-new-media-laws-fighting-disinformation-or-targeting-freedom-speech. Zugegriffen am 12.02.2020.

  • Egbert, Simon, und Matthias Leese. 2021. Criminal futures: Predictive policing and everyday police work. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elbe, Stefan, und Gemma Buckland-Merrett. 2019. Entangled security: Science, co-production, and intra-active insecurity. European Journal of International Security 4:123–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elmer, Greg. 2012. Panopticon-discipline-control. In Routledge handbook of surveillance studies, Hrsg. Kirstie Ball, Kevin D. Haggerty, und David Lyon, 21–29. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emirbayer, Mustafa, und Ann Mische. 1998. What is agency? American Journal of Sociology 103:962–1023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, Dmitry, Christian Katzenbach, und Francesca Musiani. 2016. Doing internet governance: Practices, controversies, infrastructures, and institutions. Internet Policy Review 5(3): 2197–6775.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ermoshina, Ksenia, und Francesca Musiani. 2019. Hiding from whom?: Threat models and in-the-making encryption technologies. Intermédialités.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission, und High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. 2016. Joint Framework on countering hybrid threats – a European Union response. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52016JC0018&from=EN. Zugegriffen am 24.05.2022.

  • Feenberg, Andrew. 1999. Questioning technology. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fichtner, Laura. 2018. What kind of cyber security? Theorising cyber security and mapping approaches. Internet Policy Review 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flyverbom, Mikkel. 2016. Disclosing and concealing: Internet governance, information control and the management of visibility. Internet Policy Review 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritsch, Stefan. 2011. Technology and global affairs: Technology and global affairs. International Studies Perspectives 12:27–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gartzke, Erik, und Jon R. Lindsay. 2015. ‚Weaving Tangled Webs: Offense, Defense, and Deception in Cyberspace‘. Security Studies 24(2): 316–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2015.1038188.

  • Geuss, Raymond. 2013. Privatheit: eine Genealogie. Berlin: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie, Tarleton. 2018. ‚Regulation of and by Platforms‘. In The SAGE Handbook of Social Media, by Jean Burgess, Alice Marwick, and Thomas Poell, 254–78. 1 Oliver’s Yard, 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473984066.n15.

  • Gilliom, John. 2001. Overseers of the poor: Surveillance, resistance, and the limits of privacy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gürses, Seda, Arun Kundnani, und Joris Van Hoboken. 2016. Crypto and empire: The contradictions of counter-surveillance advocacy. Media, Culture & Society 38:576–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, Ian. 1988. The participant irrealist at large in the laboratory. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 39:277–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haggerty, Kevin D., und Richard V. Ericson. 2000. The surveillant assemblage. British Journal of Sociology 51:605–622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, Donna Jeanne. 1991. Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York/London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, Donna Jeanne. 1997. Modest-Witness@Second-Millennium.FemaleMan-Meets-OncoMouse: Feminism and technoscience. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayles, N. Katherine. 2017. Unthought: The power of the cognitive nonconscious. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Herrera, Geoffrey L. 2002. The politics of bandwidth: International political implications of a global digital information network. Review of International Studies 28:93–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, Jeanette, Christian Katzenbach, und Kirsten Gollatz. 2016. ‚Between Coordination and Regulation: Finding the Governance in Internet Governance‘. New Media & Society, March, 146144481663997. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816639975.

  • Huysmans, Jef. 2014. Security unbound: Enacting democratic limits. London/New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen, Katja Lindskov. 2015. Experimentation in humanitarian locations: UNHCR and biometric registration of Afghan refugees. Security Dialogue 46:144–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, Sheila. 2005. Let them eat cake’: GM foods and the democratic imagination. In Science and citizens: Globalization and the challenge of engagement, Hrsg. Melissa Leach, Ian Scoones, und Brian Wynne, 183–198. New York: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, Sheila, Hrsg. 2010. States of knowledge: The co-production of science and social order. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeandesboz, Julien. 2016. Smartening border security in the European Union: An associational inquiry. Security Dialogue 47:292–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaldor, Mary. 2018. Global security cultures. Cambridge, UK/Medford: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kannengießer, Sigrid. 2020. Reflecting and acting on datafication – CryptoParties as an example of re-active data activism. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 26:1060–1073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kessler, Oliver, und Christopher Daase. 2008. From insecurity to uncertainty: Risk and the paradox of security politics. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 33:211–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitchin, Rob. 2014. Big Data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts. Big Data & Society 1:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, Hans. 2002. ‚ICANN and Internet Governance: Leveraging Technical Coordination to Realize Global Public Policy‘. The Information Society 18(3): 193–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240290074959.

  • Koddenbrock, Kai. 2015. Strategies of critique in international relations: From Foucault and Latour towards Marx. European Journal of International Relations 21:243–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Komasová, Sarah. 2021. Airport security as translation through division and movement. Online First: Social Studies of Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraft, Ina. 2018. Hybrider Krieg – zu Konjunktur, Dynamik und Funktion eines Konzepts. Zeitschrift für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik 11:305–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lagerwaard, Pieter. 2020. Flattening the international: Producing financial intelligence through a platform. Critical Studies on Security 8:160–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, Bruno. 2010. Eine neue Soziologie für eine neue Gesellschaft: Einführung in die Akteur-Netzwerk-Theorie. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leander, Anna. 2013. Technological agency in the co-constitution of legal expertise and the US drone program. Leiden Journal of International Law 26:811–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leese, Matthias. 2014. The new profiling: Algorithms, black boxes, and the failure of anti-discriminatory safeguards in the European Union. Security Dialogue 45:494–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leese, Matthias. 2021. Die Sache mit der Technologie: Zur Neuordnung eines analytischen Bereichs in den Internationalen Beziehungen. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 28:151–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, Karen, und Bruce Schneier. 2020. Privacy threats in intimate relationships. Journal of Cybersecurity 6:1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopez-Neira, Isabel, Trupti Patel, Simon Parkin, George Danezis, und Leonie Tanczer. 2019. ‚Internet of things‘: How abuse is getting smarter safe. The Domestic Abuse Quarterly 63:22–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, David. 2003. Surveillance as social sorting, computer codes and mobile bodies. In Surveillance as social sorting: Privacy, risk, and digital discrimination, Hrsg. David Lyon, 13–30. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, David. 2014. Surveillance, snowden, and big data: Capacities, consequences, critique. Big Data & Society 1:1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mälksoo, Maria. 2018. Countering hybrid warfare as ontological security management: The emerging practices of the EU and NATO. European Security 27:374–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marx, Gary T. 2007. Rocky bottoms: Techno-fallacies of an age of information: Rocky bottoms. International Political Sociology 1:83–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, Tim. 1992. The crypto anarchist manifesto. http://www.activism.net/cypherpunk/crypto-anarchy.html. Zugegriffen am 13.03.2015.

  • McCarthy, D. R. 2013. Technology and „the International“ or: How I learned to stop worrying and love determinism. Millennium – Journal of International Studies 41:470–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millar, Jason. 2009. Core privacy, a problem for predictive data mining. In Lessons from the identity trail: Anonymity, privacy and identity in a networked society, Hrsg. Ian Kerr, Valerie M. Steeves, und Carole Lucock, 103–119. New York/Toronto: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mol, Annemarie. 2010. Actor-network theory: sensitive terms and enduring tensions. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie. Sonderheft 50:253–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monsees, Linda. 2020a. ‚A war against truth‘ – Understanding the fake news controversy. Critical Studies on Security 8:116–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monsees, Linda. 2020b. Crypto-politics: Encryption and democratic practices in the digital era. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, Milton L. 1999. ICANN and Internet governance: Sorting through the debris of „self-regulation“. info 1:497–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, Milton L. 2010. Networks and states: The global politics of internet governance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, Milton L., und Farzaneh Badiei. 2020. Inventing internet governance: The historical trajectory of the phenomenon and the field. In Researching internet governance: Methods, frameworks, futures, Hrsg. Laura DeNardis, Derrick Cogburn, Nanette S. Levinson, und Francesca Musiani, 53–89. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nissenbaum, Helen. 2005. Where computer security meets national security1. Ethics and Information Technology 7:61–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nissenbaum, Helen Fay. 2010. Privacy in context. Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford: Stanford Law Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oyedemi, Toks Dele. 2021. Digital coloniality and ‚Next Billion Users‘: The political economy of Google Station in Nigeria. Information, Communication & Society 24:329–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paragi, Beata. 2020. Digital4development? European data protection in the Global South. Third World Quarterly 42:254–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Passoth, Jan-Hendrik, und Nicholas J. Rowland. 2010. Actor-network state: Integrating actor-network theory and state theory. International Sociology 25:818–841.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinch, Trevor J., und Wiebe E. Bijker. 1984. The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social Studies of Science 14:399–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plessis, Gitte du. 2017. When pathogens determine the territory: Toward a concept of non-human borders. European Journal of International Relations 24:391–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reppy, J. 1990. The technological imperative in strategic thought. Journal of Peace Research 27:101–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuter, Markus. 2021. Bundeskriminalamt soll Pegasus-Trojaner gekauft haben. Netzpolitik.org https://netzpolitik.org/2021/ueberwachung-bundeskriminalamt-soll-pegasus-trojaner-gekauft-haben/. Zugegriffen am 03.11.2021.

  • Rider, Karina. 2018. The privacy paradox: How market privacy facilitates government surveillance. Information, Communication & Society 21:1369–1385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rid, Thomas. 2013. Cyber War Will Not Take Place. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roessler, Beate. 2008. New ways of thinking about privacy. In The Oxford handbook of political theory, Hrsg. John S. Dryzek, Bonnie Honig, und Anne Phillips, 694–712. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothe, Delf. 2017. Seeing like a satellite: Remote sensing and the ontological politics of environmental security. Security Dialogue 48:334–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothe, Delf. 2020. Jellyfish encounters: Science, technology and security in the Anthropocene ocean. Critical Studies on Security 8:145–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saco, Diana. 2002. Cybering democracy: Public space and the Internet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salter, Mark B., Hrsg. 2015. Making things international.: Circuits and motion. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauer, F., und N. Schörnig. 2012. Killer drones: The „silver bullet“ of democratic warfare? Security Dialogue 43:363–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saugmann Andersen, Rune. 2017. Video, algorithms and security: How digital video platforms produce post-sovereign security articulations. Security Dialogue 48:354–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayes, Edwin. 2014. Actor – Network Theory and methodology: Just what does it mean to say that nonhumans have agency? Social Studies of Science 44:134–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneckener, Ulrich. 2016. Hybrider Krieg in Zeiten der Geopolitik? Zur Deutung und Charakterisierung des Donbass-Konflikts. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 57:586–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schouten, Peer. 2014. Security as controversy: Reassembling security at Amsterdam Airport. Security Dialogue 45:23–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulze, Matthias. 2015. Patterns of surveillance legitimization. The German discourse on the NSA scandal. Surveillance & Society 13:197–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shires, James. 2020. Cyber-noir: Cybersecurity and popular culture. Contemporary Security Policy 41:82–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shokooh Valle, Firuzeh. 2020. Turning fear into pleasure: Feminist resistance against online violence in the Global South. Feminist Media Studies 4:621–638.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slupska, Julia. 2019. Safe at home: Towards a feminist critique of cybersecurity. St. Anthony’s International Review 15:83–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, Ty, und Brent J. Steele. 2017. ‚Micro-Moves in International Relations Theory‘. European Journal of International Relations 23(2): 267–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066116634442.

  • Stalder, Felix. 2011. Autonomy beyond privacy? A rejoinder to Colin Bennett. Surveillance & Society 8:508–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Statista. 2021. E-Commerce in Deutschland: Daten und Fakten zum boomenden Onlinegeschäft. https://de.statista.com/themen/247/e-commerce/. Zugegriffen am 03.11.2021.

  • Steiger, Stefan, Wolf J. Schünemann, und Katharina Dimmroth. 2017. Outrage without consequences? Post-snowden discourses and governmental practice in Germany. Media and Communication 5:7–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, Tim. 2018. Global cybersecurity: New directions in theory and methods. Politics and Governance 6:1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanczer, Leonie Maria. 2017. The terrorist – Hacker/hacktivist distinction: An investigation of self-identified hackers and hacktivists. In Terrorists’ use of the internet: Assessment and response, Hrsg. Maura Conway, Lee Jarvis, Orla Lehane, Stuart MacDonald, und Lella Nouri, 77–92. Amsterdam: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teboho Ansorge, J. 2011. Digital power in world politics: Databases, panopticons and Erwin Cuntz. Millennium – Journal of International Studies 40:65–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsing, Anna Lowenhaupt. 2015. The mushroom at the end of the world: On the possibility of life in capitalist ruins. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ulbricht, Lena. 2018. When big data meet securitization. Algorithmic regulation with passenger name records. European Journal for Security Research 3:139–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNHCR. 2015. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, David Kaye. UNHCR. A/HRC/29/32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voelkner, Nadine. 2011. Managing pathogenic circulation: Human security and the migrant health assemblage in Thailand. Security Dialogue 42:239–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren, Samuel D., und Louis D. Brandeis. 1890. The right to privacy. Harvard Law Review 4:193–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westermeier, Carola. 2020. Money is data – The platformization of financial transactions. Information, Communication & Society 23:2047–2063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winner, Langdon. 1980. Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus 109:121–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winner, Langdon. 1993. Upon opening the black box and finding it empty: Social constructivism and the philosophy of technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values 18:362–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff, Josephine. 2016. What we talk about when we talk about cybersecurity: Security in internet governance debates. Internet Policy Review 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt, Sally. 2008. Technological determinism is dead: Long live technological determinism. In The handbook of science and technology studies, Hrsg. Edward J. Hackett, 165–180. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of International Relations Prague, Prague, Czechia

    Linda Monsees

Authors
  1. Linda Monsees
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Linda Monsees .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universität der Bundeswehr München, Neubiberg, Deutschland

    Frank Sauer

  2. Universität der Bundeswehr München, Neubiberg, Deutschland

    Luba von Hauff

  3. Universität der Bundeswehr München, Neubiberg, Deutschland

    Carlo Masala

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 Der/die Autor(en), exklusiv lizenziert an Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Monsees, L. (2024). Technik, Digitalisierung und internationale Politik. In: Sauer, F., von Hauff, L., Masala, C. (eds) Handbuch Internationale Beziehungen. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-33953-1_59

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-33953-1_59

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-33952-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-33953-1

  • eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation