Failing worse? Science, security and the birth of a border technology

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)
143 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Despite increased attention, investment and research, the security technologies deployed at sovereign borders often fail to ‘properly’ distinguish between safe and dangerous travellers and goods. This paper transposes on-site border malfunctions into the antecedent register of research and development to explore how failure operates in the design, construction and testing of a border security technology. Drawing from extensive ethnographic research of a European-wide project to develop the Handhold portable CBRNE detector, this paper traces how failure is mobilized as an instructive experience in the professional cultures of science, engineering and governance, and retrospectively narrated as a necessary step on the road to eventual success. In exploring the limitations of this understanding, the paper demonstrates how competing experiences of failure constantly trouble the daily routines of scientists and engineers, shape informal de-risking strategies, and fuel the relentless pursuit of innovation. To contest the dominant account of failure as an instructive experience, the paper argues that more creative and critical research into the heterogeneous life-worlds of failure is needed in order to politicize the consequences of border failures and connect them to the antecedent register of scientific research and development.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)887-910
Number of pages24
JournalEuropean Journal of International Relations
Volume24
Issue number4
Early online date03 Nov 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2018

Fingerprint

science
research and development
experience
engineering science
engineer
road
governance
innovation

Cite this

@article{2c061e944ac14130bd3c3db54cfb2d24,
title = "Failing worse? Science, security and the birth of a border technology",
abstract = "Despite increased attention, investment and research, the security technologies deployed at sovereign borders often fail to ‘properly’ distinguish between safe and dangerous travellers and goods. This paper transposes on-site border malfunctions into the antecedent register of research and development to explore how failure operates in the design, construction and testing of a border security technology. Drawing from extensive ethnographic research of a European-wide project to develop the Handhold portable CBRNE detector, this paper traces how failure is mobilized as an instructive experience in the professional cultures of science, engineering and governance, and retrospectively narrated as a necessary step on the road to eventual success. In exploring the limitations of this understanding, the paper demonstrates how competing experiences of failure constantly trouble the daily routines of scientists and engineers, shape informal de-risking strategies, and fuel the relentless pursuit of innovation. To contest the dominant account of failure as an instructive experience, the paper argues that more creative and critical research into the heterogeneous life-worlds of failure is needed in order to politicize the consequences of border failures and connect them to the antecedent register of scientific research and development.",
author = "Debbie Lisle",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1177/1354066117738854",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "887--910",
journal = "European Journal of International Relations",
issn = "1354-0661",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "4",

}

Failing worse? Science, security and the birth of a border technology. / Lisle, Debbie.

In: European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 24, No. 4, 12.2018, p. 887-910.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Failing worse? Science, security and the birth of a border technology

AU - Lisle, Debbie

PY - 2018/12

Y1 - 2018/12

N2 - Despite increased attention, investment and research, the security technologies deployed at sovereign borders often fail to ‘properly’ distinguish between safe and dangerous travellers and goods. This paper transposes on-site border malfunctions into the antecedent register of research and development to explore how failure operates in the design, construction and testing of a border security technology. Drawing from extensive ethnographic research of a European-wide project to develop the Handhold portable CBRNE detector, this paper traces how failure is mobilized as an instructive experience in the professional cultures of science, engineering and governance, and retrospectively narrated as a necessary step on the road to eventual success. In exploring the limitations of this understanding, the paper demonstrates how competing experiences of failure constantly trouble the daily routines of scientists and engineers, shape informal de-risking strategies, and fuel the relentless pursuit of innovation. To contest the dominant account of failure as an instructive experience, the paper argues that more creative and critical research into the heterogeneous life-worlds of failure is needed in order to politicize the consequences of border failures and connect them to the antecedent register of scientific research and development.

AB - Despite increased attention, investment and research, the security technologies deployed at sovereign borders often fail to ‘properly’ distinguish between safe and dangerous travellers and goods. This paper transposes on-site border malfunctions into the antecedent register of research and development to explore how failure operates in the design, construction and testing of a border security technology. Drawing from extensive ethnographic research of a European-wide project to develop the Handhold portable CBRNE detector, this paper traces how failure is mobilized as an instructive experience in the professional cultures of science, engineering and governance, and retrospectively narrated as a necessary step on the road to eventual success. In exploring the limitations of this understanding, the paper demonstrates how competing experiences of failure constantly trouble the daily routines of scientists and engineers, shape informal de-risking strategies, and fuel the relentless pursuit of innovation. To contest the dominant account of failure as an instructive experience, the paper argues that more creative and critical research into the heterogeneous life-worlds of failure is needed in order to politicize the consequences of border failures and connect them to the antecedent register of scientific research and development.

U2 - 10.1177/1354066117738854

DO - 10.1177/1354066117738854

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 887

EP - 910

JO - European Journal of International Relations

JF - European Journal of International Relations

SN - 1354-0661

IS - 4

ER -