SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN si.umich.edu Infrastructural heuristics: toward a (policy) science of cyberinfrastructure Steven Jackson, University of Michigan Paul Edwards, University of Michigan Geoffrey Bowker, Santa Clara University

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN si.umich.edu “History and Theory of Infrastructure: Lessons for New Scientific Cyberinfrastructures” (University of Michigan, Sept 2006; NSF Grant # ) Understanding Infrastructure: Dynamics, Tensions, and Design (January 2007)

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN si.umich.edu Cyberinfrastructure (our working def’n) – “the set of organizational practices, technical infrastructures, and social norms that collectively provide for the smooth operation of scientific work at a distance”

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN si.umich.edu TECHNICAL SOCIAL Becomes visible upon breakdown Embeddedness Built on an installed base Embodiment of standards Transparency Reach/Scope Links with conventions of practice Learned as part of membership Boundaries between social and technical work can often be shifted in either direction

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN si.umich.edu Infrastructural dynamics: tracks & trajectories n Momentum and path dependencies n Systems, networks, and internetworks n What are the break points in CI development? When, and by what mechanisms, does CI get ‘locked in’?

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN si.umich.edu Infrastructural dynamics: transfer, travel & interconnection n Growing to scale. n What’s in a standard? n The power of gateways n What / who are the gateway technologies, organizations, and people in CI development? What steps can be taken to support / extend such bridging work?

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN si.umich.edu Infrastructural tensions: interest & exclusion n The insides and outsides of infrastructure n Infrastructural orphans n Who gains and who loses through CI development? What are the available mechanisms for inclusion and redistribution?

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN si.umich.edu Infrastructural tensions: innovation & incumbency n Infrastructure and entitlement n Problems of ‘capture’ n Who are the ‘incumbents’ of CI development? How can the interests of existing constituencies be balanced against those of innovation and ‘new entrants’?

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN si.umich.edu Infrastructural tensions: data & working epistemologies of the sciences n What’s data? n Whose data? n Who to trust? n The problem of metadata. n What existing data cultures / practices characterize the various CI domain sciences? How can CI be grown to accommodate, reflect, and support these?

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN si.umich.edu Designing (cyber)infrastructure? From design to strategic action… From blueprints or maps to principles of navigation…

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN si.umich.edu Toward a (policy) science of cyberinfrastructure? n What are the break points in CI development? When, and by what mechanisms, does CI get ‘locked in’? n What / who are the gateway technologies, organizations, and people in CI development? What steps can be taken to support / extend such bridging work? n Who gains and who loses through CI development? What are the available mechanisms for inclusion and redistribution? n Who are the ‘incumbents’ of CI development? How can the interests of existing constituencies be balanced against those of innovation and ‘new entrants’? n What existing data cultures / practices characterize the various CI domain sciences? How can CI be grown to accommodate, reflect, and support these?

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN si.umich.edu Thank you – comments and questions welcome… Steven Jackson School of Information University of Michigan