Genealogie von Netzwerkkonzepten

Inner- und außerhalb der Sozialwissenschaften hat das Netzwerkkonzept in den letzten Jahrzehnten eine starke Konjunktur erfahren und ist zu einer dominanten Strukturbeschreibung unserer Gegenwart avanciert, aber auch ins Zentrum gesellschaftlicher Restrukturierungen gerückt. Scheint die Sicht auf Welt und Gesellschaft als Netzwerk auch als selbstevident, so beruht sie doch auf bestimmten historischen und epistemischen Vorraussetzungen. Ziel der vorliegenden Arbeit ist es, diese Voraussetzungen genealogisch zu erschließen. Das Mitte des 18. Jahrhunderts in der Naturgeschichte aufkommende abstrakte Netzwerkkonzept bezeichnet zunächst noch eine starre, unveränderliche Ordnung, in welche die Lebewesen sich ohne funktionalen Bezug zueinander einreihen. Mit einem Wandel der epistemischen Grundlagen des westlichen Denkens Anfang des 19. Jahrhunderts werden dann Konzeptionen von Netzwerken vorstellbar, in denen diese als Gesamtheiten funktionaler Relationen erscheinen und eine diskontinuierliche, dynamische Ordnung darstellen, die das Produkt tiefer liegender Erzeugungsprinzipien ist. Auch die Gefüge von Straßen, Kanälen, Verteidigungsanlagen und Blutgefäßen werden so als Netzwerke fassbar, in welchen die einzelnen Bestandteile ihre Funktion und ihren Stellenwert erst durch die Einbindung ins Ganze erhalten. Grundlage moderner Netzwerkkonzepte ist die Vorstellung eines die Netzwerkelemente verbindenden Flusses. Als zirkulierende Gefüge entwickeln Netzwerke eine ihnen eigene, wirkmächtige Dynamik. Damit diese sich entfalten kann, muss die Zirkulation reguliert und kontrolliert werden, ohne direkt in sie einzugreifen. Gleichzeitig wird unterstellt, dass die Netzwerken zugrunde liegende Logik des Flusses natürlichen, technischen und sozialen Phänomenen gemeinsam sei. Das Netzwerkkonzept wird so zum Ausgangspunkt biologistischer und vitalistischer Gesellschaftskonzeptionen, die Ausdruck einer liberalen Rationalität des Regierens sind. Im 20. Jahrhundert aufkommende Konzeptionen sozialer Netzwerke beruhen auf der Konstitution eines sozialen Raumes, in dem Gesellschaft als durch eine Gesamtheit konkreter Relationen gebildet erscheint. Das Soziale bestehe aus flüchtigen Prozessen, die erst in ihrer Verbindung und Verknüpfung in Netzwerken feste Strukturen und Ordnungseinheiten ergäben. Auch bei solchen Konzeptionen bleibt der Topos des Flusses und der einer vitalistischen Eigendynamik von Netzwerken erhalten. In der sozialen Netzwerkanalyse, die ab den 1970ern stark an Popularität gewinnt, werden durch die formelle Bestimmung von Netzwerken alle möglichen Phänomene als solche darstellbar. In ihrem Eigenverständnis eher eine Methode, führt die Netzwerkanalyse dennoch zu substantialistischen Auffassungen von Netzwerken, die (wie bei früheren Netzwerkkonzepten) utopisch-normativ aufgeladen sind. Gleichzeitig leistet die Netzwerkanalyse Deutungen des Sozialen Vorschub, die dieses als strategisches Handlungsfeld und Ressource begreifen. In der post-strukturalistischen Philosophie und der Actor-Network Theory dient das Netzbild der Darstellung einer nicht-reduktiven Logik und der Unterlaufung hegemonialer Kategorisierungen. In den 1990ern werden Netzwerke zunehmend als neue Formen gesellschaftlicher Steuerung aufgefasst. Das Netzwerkkonzept dient jedoch nicht nur der sozialwissenschaftlichen Beschreibung – es ist gleichzeitig in den Mittelpunkt gesellschaftlicher Restrukturierungen gerückt und zentraler Bestandteil einer neuen Konfiguration der ideologischen Grundlagen des Kapitalismus geworden. Von hier aus ließen sich Netzwerkkonzepte als Regierungs- und Selbsttechnologien im Rahmen einer neuen Rationalität gesellschaftlicher Steuerung begreifen.The concept of “the network” has experienced exponential growth, both inside and outside the social sciences. Not only has it become a predominant description of the structure of present-day societies, but also a crucial term in their reconstruction. While the description of social and other phenomena as networks appears to be self-evident, it nevertheless depends on certain historical and epistemic preconditions. The aim of this paper is to expose these preconditions through a genealogy of network concepts. The network developed as an abstract concept in the natural historic works of the 18th Century and initially denoted a rigid and immutable order in which creatures arrange themselves without any functional reference to one another. Based on a change of the foundations of western thought, at the beginning of the 19th Century, it became possible to conceptualize networks as a totality of functional relations. From then on, they could represent a discontinuous and dynamic order which is the product of more entrenched generating principles. The entirety of roads, channels, defensive fortifications and blood vessels became conceivable as a network in which the single constituents gain their function and significance through their integration as a whole. The foundation for the modern network concept comprises the notion of a flow that connects all the elements of a network. Networks as a circulating structure develop a specific dynamic of their own. To ensure the development of this dynamic, it is necessary to regulate and control the circulation without direct interference. In the same time, the assumption of a common network logic of natural, technical and social phenomena leads to biologistic and vitalistic conceptions of society which are the expression of a liberal governmentality. The in the first half of the 20th Century emerging concepts of social networks are based on the constitution of a social space in which society is conceived as the entirety of concrete relations. Conceived as such, the social seems to consist of ephemeral processes which only constitute firm social formations through their constant interlocking. The notion of a constitutive flow and vitalistic dynamics of networks is maintained in these notions. In Social Network Analysis, which rapidly gained popularity in the 1970s, all kinds of social phenomena become conceivable as a network due to a formal designation of the term. Rather a method than social theory, Social Network Analysis nevertheless leads to substantial conceptions of networks, which are (similar to earlier conceptions) normatively charged. At the same time, Network Analysis abets interpretations of the social as being a strategic field of action and a resource. In post-structural philosophy as well as in the actor-network theory the notion of network serves as a tool for the representation of a non-reductive logic and for the subversion of hegemonic categories. In the 1990s, networks were increasingly conceived as new modes of governing social action. But the concept of networks is not only used for the scientific description of society, it is also a strategic term in the present restructuring of society and a pivotal element of a new ideological configuration of capitalism. From here on, network concepts might be conceived as technologies of power and the self within the frame of a new rationality of governance

The biosocial genome? : Interdisciplinary perspectives on environmental epigenetics, health and society

In recent years, research on how the human environment and life-style influence gene expression has generated considerable scientific and public interest. Articles in prominent international newspapers with headlines such as “Why your DNA isn’t your destiny” (Time Magazine in 2010) or “Poverty leaves traces in children’s genome” (Süddeutsche Zeitung in 2016) have drawn public interest to the emerging field of environmental epigenetics. It is a sub-division of the much more heterogeneous research field of epigenetics, which aims to understand how interactions between the environment and the genome can lead to epigenetic modifications that affect gene expression. Environmental epigenetics is often heralded as providing a revolutionary perspective on disease etiology, particularly with regard to so-called ‘life-style diseases’ such as cardiovascular disease or diabetes. It is also often presented as a vital new framework for understanding differences in the susceptibility and resilience to mental illness and the long-term damaging effects of a wide variety of environmental factors. Environmental epigenetics engages with the social context of both individuals and populations. Studies investigate, for example, how socio-economic status, exercise habits, diet or experiences of trauma might influence biological processes at the molecular level. This has created great interest among social scientists and scholars in the humanities as it raises a number of questions at the intersection of the natural sciences, the social sciences and the humanities: for example, how to conceptualize the social environment in a laboratory context. To explore research areas at these intersections and assess the potential social and political implications of environmental epigenetics, international scholars from the life sciences, social sciences and humanities met in January 2017 in Munich, Germany. This article presents some of the main findings from these interdisciplinary discussions. We conclude that environmental epigenetics has great potential for elucidating how human society affects human biology, but we caution against over-simplified translations from social structures to biological processes and vice versa

New frontiers for Biosocial Birth Cohort Research: interdisciplinary approaches to exposure, harmonisation and collaboration

In this Open Letter we bring together researchers from the Biosocial Birth Cohort Research (BBCR) network to reflect on interdisciplinary research and methods within birth cohorts and to draw attention to social science approaches to this field, which we argue are underutilized. A more comprehensive and consistent integration of social science approaches would expand the scope and value of research with birth cohorts. We critically engage three specific areas of birth cohort research that provide significant opportunities for exchange across disciplines; how exposure is defined and measured in birth cohorts, the harmonisation of data within and between birth cohorts and the broader experience of interdisciplinary collaboration in birth cohorts and birth cohort research. By reflecting on these three areas, we highlight the need for more in-depth dialogue between life and social sciences in the design of birth cohorts, the measures that are used, and the research made possible. We argue that improving the methodological tools for measuring social and biological exposures, incorporating the complexity of participant experience, and ensuring that longitudinal studies are recognised by a wider range of disciplines are essential for collaborative biosocial research with the goal of mitigating health disparities in global and public health

Developmental Origins of Health and Disease, resilience and social justice in the COVID era

The COVID-19 pandemic has shone a spotlight on how health outcomes are unequally distributed among different population groups, with disadvantaged communities and individuals being disproportionality affected in terms of infection, morbidity and mortality, as well as vaccine access. Recently, there has been considerable debate about how social disadvantage and inequality intersect with developmental processes to result in a heightened susceptibility to environmental stressors, economic shocks and large-scale health emergencies. We argue that DOHaD Society members can make important contributions to addressing issues of inequality and improving community resilience in response to COVID-19. In order to do so, it is beneficial to engage with and adopt a social justice framework. We detail how DOHaD can align its research and policy recommendations with a social justice perspective to ensure that we contribute to improving the health of present and future generations in an equitable and socially just way

Developmental origins of health and disease, resilience and social justice in the COVID era

The COVID-19 pandemic has shone a spotlight on how health outcomes are unequally distributed among different population groups, with disadvantaged communities and individuals being disproportionality affected in terms of infection, morbidity and mortality, as well as vaccine access. Recently, there has been considerable debate about how social disadvantage and inequality intersect with developmental processes to result in a heightened susceptibility to environmental stressors, economic shocks and large-scale health emergencies. We argue that DOHaD Society members can make important contributions to addressing issues of inequality and improving community resilience in response to COVID-19. In order to do so, it is beneficial to engage with and adopt a social justice framework. We detail how DOHaD can align its research and policy recommendations with a social justice perspective to ensure that we contribute to improving the health of present and future generations in an equitable and socially just way