Mandatory literature
1.
Ansari, Ahmad (2019). Decolonizing design through the perspectives of cosmological others: Arguing for an ontological turn in design research and practice. In: XRDS: Crossroads, November 2019. (4 pages)
2.
Boehnert, Joanna (2018). Design, Ecology, Politics: Towards the Ecocene. London: Bloomsbury (Chapter 14. The technofix, 10 pp). (pdf will be made available soon)
3.
Constanza-Chock, Sasha (2018). Design Justice: towards an intersectional feminist framework for design theory and practice. In Proceedings of the Design Research Society (14 pp).
4.
D’Ignazio, Cathrine and Lauren Klein (2020). Data Feminism. Cambridge: The MIT Press (Introduction: Why Data Science Needs Feminism, 20 pp).
5.
Feng, P & Andrew Feenberg (2008). Thinking about Design: Critical Theory of Technology and the Realization of Design Possibilities. In P.E. Vermaas et al. (eds) Philosphy and Design: From Engineering to Architecture. Dordrecht: Springer , pp. 105-118 (14 pp).
6.
Jones, Peter H. (2014). Systemic Design Principles for Complex Social Systems. In Metcalf, Gary (ed.) Social Systems and Design. Tokyo: Springer, pp. 91-128. (31 pp).
7.
Kiran, Asle H., Oudshoor, Nelly & Peter-Paul Verbeek (2015). Beyond checklists: towards an ethical-constructive technology assessment. In Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2(1) (15 pp).
8. Pierce, James (2012). Undesigning technology: considering the negation of design by design. In CHI’12: Proceedings of the SIHCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, May 2012, pp. 957-966 (10 pp).
9.
Sharkey, Noel (2014). Towards a principle for the human supervisory control of robot weapons. In: Politica & Società, 2 (14 pp).
10.
Shilton, Katie (2014). This is an Intervention: Foregrounding and Operationalizing Ethics During Technology Design. In Pimple, Kenneth D. (ed.) Emerging Pervasive Information and Communication Technologies (PICT): Ethical Challenges, Opportunities and Safeguards. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 177-192 (25 pp).
Secondary Resources (a selection):
Resources marked with [a] can be used as references in the exam essay. Most resources are relevant for more than one topic. I am still working on this section, so check regularly. If you have suggestions for this list, please let me know.
Meeting 1: Introduction to IN5010 – 24.02.2021
[a] Eriksen, K. G. (2020). Discomforting presence in the classroom – the affective technologies of race, racism and whiteness. Whiteness and Education, 0(0), 1–20.
Stockholm Resilience Centre (2016). Planetary Boundaries
Rockstr?m, J. (2010). Let the environment guide our development (video, 18:41 mins)
United Nations (2015). The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. More: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/
Course philosophy and located accountability
[a] de la Bellacasa, M. Puig (2012). ‘Nothing comes without its world’: thinking with care. In Sociological Review 60(2): 197-216
[a] de la Bellacasa, M. Puig (2011). Matters of Care in Technoscience: Assembling Neglected Things. In Social Studies of Science: 41(1): 85-106
[a] Haraway, D. (1988). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. In Feminist Studies 2(3).
[a] Suchman, Lucy (2002). Local accountabilities in technology production. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 14(2).
Meeting 2: Becoming a reflexive researcher – 25.02.2021
[a] Attia, M., & Edge, J. (2017). Be(com)ing a reflexive researcher: A developmental approach to research methodology. Open Review of Educational Research, 4(1), 33–45.
[a] Choudry, Aziz (2019). Activists and the Surveillance State: Learning from repression. London: Pluto Press (264 pp).
[a] Jonas, Hans (1973). Technology and Responsibility: Reflections on the new tasks of ethics. In: Social Research, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 31-54.
Oteng-Ababio, M., & van der Velden, M. (2019). ’Welcome to Sodom’—Six myths about electronic waste in Agbogbloshie, Ghana. SMART.
[a] Oudshoorn, N., Rommes, E., & Stienstra, M. (2004). Configuring the User as Everybody: Gender and Design Cultures in Information and Communication Technologies. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 29(1), 30–63. (on i-methodology)
[a] Stahl, Bernd C. (2013). Teaching Ethical Reflexivity in Information Systems: How to Equip Students to Deal With Moral and Ethical Issues of Emerging Information and Communication Technologies. In Journal of Information Systems Education, v.22(3), pp. 253-260.
[a] van der Velden, Maja (2011). When knowledges meet: Wikipedia and other stories from the contact zone. In Geert Lovink & Nathaniel Tkatz (eds.),Critical Point of View: A Wikipedia Reader. (about diffractive reading in stead of comparisson)
[a] van der Velden, M. (2010). Undesigning culture: A brief reflection on design as ethical practice. In F. Sudweeks, H. Hrachovec and C. Ess (eds). Proceedings Cultural Attitudes Towards Communication and Technology 2010, Murdoch University, Australia, 117-123
[a] Verbeek, Peter-Paul (2006). Materializing Morality: Design Ethics and technological Mediation. In: Science, technology, & Human Values, 31(3):361-380.
Weaver, J. (2020, June 18). Design has an empathy problem: White men can’t design for everyone. Medium.
Decolonising design & Postcolonial computing
Adams, N-R (2019). Decolonising the Origins of Artificial Intelligence. Becoming Human.
[a] Gurminder K. Bhambra, G. K., Gebrial, D. & Ni?anc?o?lu, K. (2018). Decolonising the University. London: Pluto Press (pp.273).
[a] Birhane, A., & Guest, O. (2020). Towards decolonising computational sciences. ArXiv:2009.14258 [Cs]. http://arxiv.org/abs/2009.14258
[a] Irani et all. (2010). Postcolonial Computing: A lens on design and development. In Proceedings of CHI2010, April 10-15, 2010, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Khandwala, A. (2019). What does it mean to decolonize design? [essay]
[a] Moe, A. & Hedland, M. (2020). Rethinking research in South-Sami Communities. In Henriksen, J-E., Hydle, I. & B. Kramvig (eds.) Recognition, reconciliation and restoration applying a decolonized understanding in social work and healing process. [reflections by non-Sami researchers]
[a] Mohamed, S., Png, M.-T., & Isaac, W. (2020). Decolonial AI: Decolonial Theory as Sociotechnical Foresight in Artificial Intelligence. Philosophy & Technology, 33(4), 659–684.
Pe?a, P. & Varon, J. (2020). Decolonising AI: A transfeminist approach to data and social justice. Medium.
[a] Philip, Kavita, Irani, Lilly and Paul Dourish (2010). Postcolonial Computing: A Tactical Survey. In Science, Technology, & Human Values, 000(00), pp. 1-27.
Raval, N. (2019). An Agenda for Decolonizing Data Science. In Spheres, 5.
[a] Smith, R. C., Winschiers-Theophilus, H., Paula Kambunga, A., & Krishnamurthy, S. (2020). Decolonizing Participatory Design: Memory Making in Namibia. Proceedings of the 16th Participatory Design Conference 2020 - Participation(s) Otherwise - Volume 1, 96–106. https://doi.org/10.1145/3385010.3385021
[a] van der Velden, Maja. (2013). Decentring Design: Wikipedia and Indigenous Knowledge. In International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 29(4), 308-316.
Wegner, Carolyn (2020). Woven Identity: Inclusive and decolonizing exploration. [Interaction design & Participatory design project with a Sami community]
Website: Decolonising Design: https://www.decolonisingdesign.com/
Meeting 3: Critical theory and other theories of technology – 26.02.2021
[a] Berg, A.-J., & Lie, M. (1995). Feminism and Constructivism: Do Artifacts Have Gender? Science, Technology, & Human Values, 20(3), 332–351.
Feenberg, Andrew (2003). What is Philosophy of Technology (text of lecture).
[a] Hedstr?m, K., Dhillon, G. & Karlsson, F. (2011). Using Actor Network Theory to Understand Information Security Management. In Security and Privacy – Silver Linings in the Cloud, Proceedings of the 25th IFIP TC-11 International Information Security Conference, SEC 2010.
[a] Pieters, W. (2011). Representing humans in systems security models: An actor-network approach. In Journal of wireless mobile networks, ubiquitous computing, and dependable applications, (2)7, 75-92.
[a] Sparrow, R. (2020). Do Robots Have Race?: Race, Social Construction, and HRI. IEEE Robotics Automation Magazine, 27(3), 144–150.
[a] Timcke, S. (2020). Algorithms and the Critical Theory of Technology. SSRN Electronic Journal.
[a] Quan-Haase, A. (2016). Theorethical Perspectives on technology. In Quan-Haase, A., Technology & Society: Social Networks, Power, and Inequality (2nd edition). Don Mills: Oxford University Press, pp. 42-61. (chapter in Document folder)
[a] van der Velden, Maja (2008). What's love got to do with IT? On ethics and accountability in telling technology stories. In F. Sudweeks, H. Hrachovec, et.al. (Eds), Cultural attitudes towards technology and communication 2008 (pp. 27-39). Murdoch: Murdoch University.
[a] Winner, L. (1980). Do Artifacts Have Politics? Daedalus, 109(1), 121–136.
[a] Wyatt, Sally (2008). Technological determinism is dead: Long live technological determinism. In The Handbook of Science & Technology Studies, E. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch and J. Wajcman (eds), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 165-181.
Intentionality [persuasion, nudging, regulation]
[a] Redstr?m, J. (2006). Persuasive Design: Fringes and Foundations. In W. A. IJsselsteijn, Y. A. W. de Kort, C. Midden, B. Eggen, & E. van den Hoven (Eds.), Persuasive Technology (pp. 112–122). Springer.
[a] Schneider, C., Weinmann, M., & vom Brocke, J. (2018). Digital nudging: Guiding online user choices through interface design. Communications of the ACM, 61(7).
[a] van der Velden, M. (2016). Design as Regulation. In J. Abdelnour-Nocera, M. Strano, C. Ess, M. Van der Velden, & H. Hrachovec (Eds.), Culture, Technology, Communication. Common World, Different Futures (pp. 32–54). Springer International Publishing.
Meeting 4: Design for sustainability – 03.03.2021
Adamson, G. (2021). The Communist Designer, the Fascist Furniture Dealer, and the Politics of Des