Classifying, Constructing, and Identifying Life Standards as Transformations of “The Biological”. Mackenzie, A., Waterton, C., Ellis, R., Frow, E. K., McNally, R., Busch, L., & Wynne, B. 38(5):701–722. 00001Paper doi abstract bibtex Recent accounts of “the biological” emphasize its thoroughgoing transformation. Accounts of biomedicalization, biotechnology, biopower, biocapital, and bioeconomy tend to agree that twentieth- and twenty-first-century life sciences transform the object of biology, the biological. Amidst so much transformation, we explore attempts to stabilize the biological through standards. We ask: how do standards handle the biological in transformation? Based on ethnographic research, the article discusses three contemporary postgenomic standards that classify, construct, or identify biological forms: the Barcoding of Life Initiative, the BioBricks Assembly Standard, and the Proteomics Standards Initiative. We rely on recent critical analyses of standardization to suggest that any attempt to attribute a fixed property to the biological actually multiplies dependencies between values, materials, and human and nonhuman agents. We highlight ways in which these biological standards cross-validate life forms with forms of life such as publics, infrastructures, and forms of disciplinary compromise. Attempts to standardize the biological, we suggest, offer a good way to see how a life form is always also a form of life.
@article{Mackenzie_2013d,
langid = {english},
title = {Classifying, {{Constructing}}, and {{Identifying Life Standards}} as {{Transformations}} of “{{The Biological}}”},
volume = {38},
issn = {0162-2439, 1552-8251},
url = {http://sth.sagepub.com.ezproxy.lancs.ac.uk/content/38/5/701},
doi = {10.1177/0162243912474324},
abstract = {Recent accounts of “the biological” emphasize its thoroughgoing transformation. Accounts of biomedicalization, biotechnology, biopower, biocapital, and bioeconomy tend to agree that twentieth- and twenty-first-century life sciences transform the object of biology, the biological. Amidst so much transformation, we explore attempts to stabilize the biological through standards. We ask: how do standards handle the biological in transformation? Based on ethnographic research, the article discusses three contemporary postgenomic standards that classify, construct, or identify biological forms: the Barcoding of Life Initiative, the BioBricks Assembly Standard, and the Proteomics Standards Initiative. We rely on recent critical analyses of standardization to suggest that any attempt to attribute a fixed property to the biological actually multiplies dependencies between values, materials, and human and nonhuman agents. We highlight ways in which these biological standards cross-validate life forms with forms of life such as publics, infrastructures, and forms of disciplinary compromise. Attempts to standardize the biological, we suggest, offer a good way to see how a life form is always also a form of life.},
number = {5},
journaltitle = {Science, Technology \& Human Values},
shortjournal = {Science Technology Human Values},
urldate = {2013-11-28},
date = {2013-09-01},
pages = {701--722},
keywords = {Proteomics,standards,publics,infrastructures,Biology,taxonomy,Synthetic Biology},
author = {Mackenzie, Adrian and Waterton, Claire and Ellis, Rebecca and Frow, Emma K. and McNally, Ruth and Busch, Lawrence and Wynne, Brian},
file = {/home/mackenza/.zotero/zotero/zl26h2qh.default/zotero/storage/T46URANV/Mackenzie et al. - 2013 - Classifying, Constructing, and Identifying Life St.pdf;/home/mackenza/.zotero/zotero/zl26h2qh.default/zotero/storage/JQ58JIRK/701.html},
note = {00001}
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"wKs9289qxq7A5Yo4B","bibbaseid":"mackenzie-waterton-ellis-frow-mcnally-busch-wynne-classifyingconstructingandidentifyinglifestandardsastransformationsofthebiological","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2018-01-18T16:22:30.393Z","title":"Classifying, Constructing, and Identifying Life Standards as Transformations of “The Biological”","author_short":["Mackenzie, A.","Waterton, C.","Ellis, R.","Frow, E. K.","McNally, R.","Busch, L.","Wynne, B."],"year":null,"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://rian39.github.io/mackenzie.bib","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","langid":"english","title":"Classifying, Constructing, and Identifying Life Standards as Transformations of “The Biological”","volume":"38","issn":"0162-2439, 1552-8251","url":"http://sth.sagepub.com.ezproxy.lancs.ac.uk/content/38/5/701","doi":"10.1177/0162243912474324","abstract":"Recent accounts of “the biological” emphasize its thoroughgoing transformation. Accounts of biomedicalization, biotechnology, biopower, biocapital, and bioeconomy tend to agree that twentieth- and twenty-first-century life sciences transform the object of biology, the biological. Amidst so much transformation, we explore attempts to stabilize the biological through standards. We ask: how do standards handle the biological in transformation? Based on ethnographic research, the article discusses three contemporary postgenomic standards that classify, construct, or identify biological forms: the Barcoding of Life Initiative, the BioBricks Assembly Standard, and the Proteomics Standards Initiative. We rely on recent critical analyses of standardization to suggest that any attempt to attribute a fixed property to the biological actually multiplies dependencies between values, materials, and human and nonhuman agents. We highlight ways in which these biological standards cross-validate life forms with forms of life such as publics, infrastructures, and forms of disciplinary compromise. Attempts to standardize the biological, we suggest, offer a good way to see how a life form is always also a form of life.","number":"5","journaltitle":"Science, Technology & Human Values","shortjournal":"Science Technology Human Values","urldate":"2013-11-28","date":"2013-09-01","pages":"701–722","keywords":"Proteomics,standards,publics,infrastructures,Biology,taxonomy,Synthetic Biology","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Mackenzie"],"firstnames":["Adrian"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Waterton"],"firstnames":["Claire"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Ellis"],"firstnames":["Rebecca"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Frow"],"firstnames":["Emma","K."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["McNally"],"firstnames":["Ruth"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Busch"],"firstnames":["Lawrence"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Wynne"],"firstnames":["Brian"],"suffixes":[]}],"file":"/home/mackenza/.zotero/zotero/zl26h2qh.default/zotero/storage/T46URANV/Mackenzie et al. - 2013 - Classifying, Constructing, and Identifying Life St.pdf;/home/mackenza/.zotero/zotero/zl26h2qh.default/zotero/storage/JQ58JIRK/701.html","note":"00001","bibtex":"@article{Mackenzie_2013d,\n langid = {english},\n title = {Classifying, {{Constructing}}, and {{Identifying Life Standards}} as {{Transformations}} of “{{The Biological}}”},\n volume = {38},\n issn = {0162-2439, 1552-8251},\n url = {http://sth.sagepub.com.ezproxy.lancs.ac.uk/content/38/5/701},\n doi = {10.1177/0162243912474324},\n abstract = {Recent accounts of “the biological” emphasize its thoroughgoing transformation. Accounts of biomedicalization, biotechnology, biopower, biocapital, and bioeconomy tend to agree that twentieth- and twenty-first-century life sciences transform the object of biology, the biological. Amidst so much transformation, we explore attempts to stabilize the biological through standards. We ask: how do standards handle the biological in transformation? Based on ethnographic research, the article discusses three contemporary postgenomic standards that classify, construct, or identify biological forms: the Barcoding of Life Initiative, the BioBricks Assembly Standard, and the Proteomics Standards Initiative. We rely on recent critical analyses of standardization to suggest that any attempt to attribute a fixed property to the biological actually multiplies dependencies between values, materials, and human and nonhuman agents. We highlight ways in which these biological standards cross-validate life forms with forms of life such as publics, infrastructures, and forms of disciplinary compromise. Attempts to standardize the biological, we suggest, offer a good way to see how a life form is always also a form of life.},\n number = {5},\n journaltitle = {Science, Technology \\& Human Values},\n shortjournal = {Science Technology Human Values},\n urldate = {2013-11-28},\n date = {2013-09-01},\n pages = {701--722},\n keywords = {Proteomics,standards,publics,infrastructures,Biology,taxonomy,Synthetic Biology},\n author = {Mackenzie, Adrian and Waterton, Claire and Ellis, Rebecca and Frow, Emma K. and McNally, Ruth and Busch, Lawrence and Wynne, Brian},\n file = {/home/mackenza/.zotero/zotero/zl26h2qh.default/zotero/storage/T46URANV/Mackenzie et al. - 2013 - Classifying, Constructing, and Identifying Life St.pdf;/home/mackenza/.zotero/zotero/zl26h2qh.default/zotero/storage/JQ58JIRK/701.html},\n note = {00001}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Mackenzie, A.","Waterton, C.","Ellis, R.","Frow, E. K.","McNally, R.","Busch, L.","Wynne, B."],"key":"Mackenzie_2013d","id":"Mackenzie_2013d","bibbaseid":"mackenzie-waterton-ellis-frow-mcnally-busch-wynne-classifyingconstructingandidentifyinglifestandardsastransformationsofthebiological","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://sth.sagepub.com.ezproxy.lancs.ac.uk/content/38/5/701"},"keyword":["Proteomics","standards","publics","infrastructures","Biology","taxonomy","Synthetic Biology"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{"mackenzie, a":"http://rian39.github.io/"}}},"search_terms":["classifying","constructing","identifying","life","standards","transformations","biological","mackenzie","waterton","ellis","frow","mcnally","busch","wynne"],"keywords":["proteomics","standards","publics","infrastructures","biology","taxonomy","synthetic biology"],"authorIDs":["54d7916496f9453b5f00086d","Puj5PqAjKsjCN89hR"],"dataSources":["7hC5czrdgBvxM5hSi"]}