Christina Holmes | St Francis Xavier University (Nova Scotia, Canada) (original) (raw)
Papers by Christina Holmes
University of British Columbia Press eBooks, Apr 15, 2021
We argue that, while there is general agreement within the field of proteomics that standards are... more We argue that, while there is general agreement within the field of proteomics that standards are important to science, the goals of the researchers, depending on their research type (discovery, methods or clinical [see Table 3.1]), determine whether they see laboratory quality standards as a necessity or as a potential barrier to scientific creativity and innovation.
Background: Outside the mass-spectrometer, proteomics research does not take place in a vacuum. I... more Background: Outside the mass-spectrometer, proteomics research does not take place in a vacuum. It is affected by policies on funding and research infrastructure. Proteomics research both impacts and is impacted by potential clinical applications. It provides new techniques & clinically relevant findings, but the possibilities for such innovations (and thus the perception of the potential for the field by funders) are also impacted by regulatory practices and the readiness of the health sector to incorporate proteomics-related tools & findings. Key to this process is how knowledge is translated. Methods: We present preliminary results from a multi-year social science project, funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, on the processes and motivations for knowledge translation in the health sciences. The proteomics case within this wider study uses qualitative methods to examine the interplay between proteomics science and regulatory and policy makers regarding clinical ap...
The Social Life of Standards: Ethnographic Methods for Local Engagement, Apr 1, 2021
What happens when uncomfortable standards, made by and often forothers, threaten the well-being a... more What happens when uncomfortable standards, made by and often forothers, threaten the well-being and livelihood of those people the standardsare applied to and the communities in which they live? This volume bringsto the reader’s attention the politics and ethics of standards within a widerange of communities and contexts. Standards are not measures in and ofthemselves but, rather, stand in for and represent values and qualities ofthings that matter. While seen as essential in advancing science, technology,and society, too careful adherence to a standard can prevent progress. Astandard may be unresponsive to practical issues that arise, and it may damage or otherwise disrupt communities, demanding attention. This bookexplores how different communities make, subvert, contest, and reassemblestandards, bringing them home in a wide range of situations and circumstances. We ask: What counts for standards, as valuations for things thatmatter, when they articulate in time and space and must respond to locationand other contingencies
Faculty of Law Australian Centre For Health Law Research School of Law, Sep 12, 2012
What happens when uncomfortable standards, made by and often forothers, threaten the well-being a... more What happens when uncomfortable standards, made by and often forothers, threaten the well-being and livelihood of those people the standardsare applied to and the communities in which they live? This volume bringsto the reader’s attention the politics and ethics of standards within a widerange of communities and contexts. Standards are not measures in and ofthemselves but, rather, stand in for and represent values and qualities ofthings that matter. While seen as essential in advancing science, technology,and society, too careful adherence to a standard can prevent progress. Astandard may be unresponsive to practical issues that arise, and it may damage or otherwise disrupt communities, demanding attention. This bookexplores how different communities make, subvert, contest, and reassemblestandards, bringing them home in a wide range of situations and circumstances. We ask: What counts for standards, as valuations for things thatmatter, when they articulate in time and space and must respond to locationand other contingencies
Science twines through many of the discussions related to hope for a return to normalcy within pu... more Science twines through many of the discussions related to hope for a return to normalcy within public discussions of COVID-19 The framings of techno-scientific solutions for COVID-19 are similar to those that are presented to address many societal problems The messy scientific and regulatory underpinnings of this desired silver bullet rarely make it fully into view Technoscientific-related hope and its associated affects can operate as a kind of "cruel optimism" (Berlant 2010, 2011) It can be an affective response to return to life as "normal" that is psychologically soothing, even as its enactment may replicate destructive social, political, and economic structures Hope and technoscience thread throughout the interactions between journalists and health officials in the health press briefings in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic Technoscientific complexity that challenges the desire to return to normal is rarely brought up in Ontario and Nova Scotia public ...
OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology, 2019
How do postgenomic innovations emerge and become legitimate? Proteomics, a frequently utilized po... more How do postgenomic innovations emerge and become legitimate? Proteomics, a frequently utilized postgenomic technology, provides a valuable case study of the sociotechnical strategies used by an emergent scientific field to establish its legitimacy and assert political power. Chief among these strategies is standard making, an inherently political process that requires examination through a critical social science lens. We report in this study an original case study from interviews with proteomics scientists and observations at conferences of the Human Proteome Organization and Australasian Proteomics Society over a 5-year period (2011-2015). The study contributes new knowledge on how an emerging postgenomic science uses standard-setting practices to politically legitimize a hitherto contested technology. Drawing on legitimacy theory, we show how proteomics scientists and organizations used standards as strategic tools to establish the legitimacy of this postgenomic field and affirm that proteomics can generate verifiable and reproducible results, thereby establishing it as a legitimate scientific field. Notably, legitimacy can be leveraged, at the same time, to maximize political power vis-à-vis other fields of science and as such embodies power relationships. These data collectively inform the broader context, in which postgenomic innovations emerge and legitimize, both technically and politically, through standards making. These findings have relevance for the design of next generation technology policies by demonstrating that standards are not "just" standards or neutral constructs but also tools to leverage political power of and by science and innovation actors, as shown in this case study of the emerging early phase of proteomics from 2011 to 2015.
Omics : a journal of integrative biology, Jun 25, 2016
Proteomics is one of the pivotal next-generation biotechnologies in the current "postgenomic... more Proteomics is one of the pivotal next-generation biotechnologies in the current "postgenomics" era. Little is known about the ways in which innovative proteomics science is navigating the complex socio-political space between laboratory and society. It cannot be assumed that the trajectory between proteomics laboratory and society is linear and unidirectional. Concerned about public accountability and hopes for knowledge-based innovations, funding agencies and citizens increasingly expect that emerging science and technologies, such as proteomics, are effectively translated and disseminated as innovation in society. Here, we describe translation strategies promoted in the knowledge translation (KT) and science communication literatures and examine the use of these strategies within the field of proteomics. Drawing on data generated from qualitative interviews with proteomics scientists and ethnographic observation of international proteomics conferences over a 5-year perio...
New Genetics and Society, 2016
Focaal, 2006
This article explores the lack of controversy over genetically modified objects (GMOs) in the dai... more This article explores the lack of controversy over genetically modified objects (GMOs) in the daily life of a research laboratory in Canada. Scientific perceptions of GMOs and the types of knowledge valued in scientific research contribute toward an absence of discussion on the wider social implications of GMOs. Technical and epistemic knowledge are crucial for the success of a scientific project, whereas discussion of the social values involved may be allocated to particular settings, people, or research stages. GMOs, within scientific circles, are seen as many individual projects with different goals, rather than as a single object. Therefore, according to this view, it is inappropriate to be opposed to or to support GMOs in general, without first ascertaining the specifics of a particular project. How then are scientists engaged in seemingly local, distinct projects seen as globally defending this technology? Scientific expertise unevenly translates into political voice, transfor...
Proteomics is one of the pivotal next-generation biotechnologies in the current “postgenomics” er... more Proteomics is one of the pivotal next-generation biotechnologies in the current “postgenomics” era. Little is known about the ways in which innovative proteomics science is navigating the complex socio-political space between laboratory and society. It cannot be assumed that the trajectory between proteomics laboratory and society is linear and unidirectional. Concerned about public accountability and hopes for knowledge-based innovations, funding agencies and citizens increasingly expect that emerging science and technologies, such as proteomics, are effectively translated and disseminated as innovation in society. Here, we describe translation strategies promoted in the knowledge translation (KT) and science communication literatures and examine the use of these strategies within the field of proteomics. Drawing on data generated from qualitative interviews with proteomics scientists and ethnographic observation of international proteomics conferences over a 5-year period, we found that proteomics science incorporates a variety of KT strategies to reach knowledge users outside the field. To attain the full benefit of KT, however, proteomics scientists must challenge their own normative assumptions and approaches to innovation dissemination—beyond the current paradigm relying primarily on publication for one's scientific peers within one's field—and embrace the value of broader (interdisciplinary) KT strategies in promoting the uptake of their research. Notably, the Human Proteome Organization (HUPO) is paying increasing attention to a broader range of KT strategies, including targeted dissemination, integrated KT, and public outreach. We suggest that increasing the variety of KT strategies employed by proteomics scientists is timely and would serve well the omics system sciences community.
Richard Lewontin proposed that the ability of a scientific field to create a narrative for public... more Richard Lewontin proposed that the ability of a scientific field to create a narrative for public understanding garners it social relevance. This article applies Lewontin’s conceptual framework of the functions of science (manipulatory and explanatory) to compare and explain the current differences in perceived societal relevance of genetics/genomics and
proteomics. We provide three examples to illustrate the social relevance and strong cultural narrative of genetics/genomics for which no counterpart exists for proteomics. We argue that the major difference between genetics/genomics and proteomics is that genomics has a strong explanatory function,
due to the strong cultural narrative of heredity. Based on qualitative interviews and observations of proteomics conferences, we suggest that the nature of proteins, lack of public understanding, and theoretical complexity exacerbates this difference for proteomics. Lewontin’s framework suggests
that social scientists may find that omics sciences affect social relations in different ways than past analyses of genetics.
Sociologias, 2008
Biotechnology and plant genetic engineering hold strong appeal in Colombia, due to the technology... more Biotechnology and plant genetic engineering hold strong appeal in Colombia, due to the technology's potential to enable participation in the new knowledge economy and as a way of harnessing the country's great biodiversity. However, genetic engineering technology ...
Culture & Agriculture, 2009
University of British Columbia Press eBooks, Apr 15, 2021
We argue that, while there is general agreement within the field of proteomics that standards are... more We argue that, while there is general agreement within the field of proteomics that standards are important to science, the goals of the researchers, depending on their research type (discovery, methods or clinical [see Table 3.1]), determine whether they see laboratory quality standards as a necessity or as a potential barrier to scientific creativity and innovation.
Background: Outside the mass-spectrometer, proteomics research does not take place in a vacuum. I... more Background: Outside the mass-spectrometer, proteomics research does not take place in a vacuum. It is affected by policies on funding and research infrastructure. Proteomics research both impacts and is impacted by potential clinical applications. It provides new techniques & clinically relevant findings, but the possibilities for such innovations (and thus the perception of the potential for the field by funders) are also impacted by regulatory practices and the readiness of the health sector to incorporate proteomics-related tools & findings. Key to this process is how knowledge is translated. Methods: We present preliminary results from a multi-year social science project, funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, on the processes and motivations for knowledge translation in the health sciences. The proteomics case within this wider study uses qualitative methods to examine the interplay between proteomics science and regulatory and policy makers regarding clinical ap...
The Social Life of Standards: Ethnographic Methods for Local Engagement, Apr 1, 2021
What happens when uncomfortable standards, made by and often forothers, threaten the well-being a... more What happens when uncomfortable standards, made by and often forothers, threaten the well-being and livelihood of those people the standardsare applied to and the communities in which they live? This volume bringsto the reader’s attention the politics and ethics of standards within a widerange of communities and contexts. Standards are not measures in and ofthemselves but, rather, stand in for and represent values and qualities ofthings that matter. While seen as essential in advancing science, technology,and society, too careful adherence to a standard can prevent progress. Astandard may be unresponsive to practical issues that arise, and it may damage or otherwise disrupt communities, demanding attention. This bookexplores how different communities make, subvert, contest, and reassemblestandards, bringing them home in a wide range of situations and circumstances. We ask: What counts for standards, as valuations for things thatmatter, when they articulate in time and space and must respond to locationand other contingencies
Faculty of Law Australian Centre For Health Law Research School of Law, Sep 12, 2012
What happens when uncomfortable standards, made by and often forothers, threaten the well-being a... more What happens when uncomfortable standards, made by and often forothers, threaten the well-being and livelihood of those people the standardsare applied to and the communities in which they live? This volume bringsto the reader’s attention the politics and ethics of standards within a widerange of communities and contexts. Standards are not measures in and ofthemselves but, rather, stand in for and represent values and qualities ofthings that matter. While seen as essential in advancing science, technology,and society, too careful adherence to a standard can prevent progress. Astandard may be unresponsive to practical issues that arise, and it may damage or otherwise disrupt communities, demanding attention. This bookexplores how different communities make, subvert, contest, and reassemblestandards, bringing them home in a wide range of situations and circumstances. We ask: What counts for standards, as valuations for things thatmatter, when they articulate in time and space and must respond to locationand other contingencies
Science twines through many of the discussions related to hope for a return to normalcy within pu... more Science twines through many of the discussions related to hope for a return to normalcy within public discussions of COVID-19 The framings of techno-scientific solutions for COVID-19 are similar to those that are presented to address many societal problems The messy scientific and regulatory underpinnings of this desired silver bullet rarely make it fully into view Technoscientific-related hope and its associated affects can operate as a kind of "cruel optimism" (Berlant 2010, 2011) It can be an affective response to return to life as "normal" that is psychologically soothing, even as its enactment may replicate destructive social, political, and economic structures Hope and technoscience thread throughout the interactions between journalists and health officials in the health press briefings in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic Technoscientific complexity that challenges the desire to return to normal is rarely brought up in Ontario and Nova Scotia public ...
OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology, 2019
How do postgenomic innovations emerge and become legitimate? Proteomics, a frequently utilized po... more How do postgenomic innovations emerge and become legitimate? Proteomics, a frequently utilized postgenomic technology, provides a valuable case study of the sociotechnical strategies used by an emergent scientific field to establish its legitimacy and assert political power. Chief among these strategies is standard making, an inherently political process that requires examination through a critical social science lens. We report in this study an original case study from interviews with proteomics scientists and observations at conferences of the Human Proteome Organization and Australasian Proteomics Society over a 5-year period (2011-2015). The study contributes new knowledge on how an emerging postgenomic science uses standard-setting practices to politically legitimize a hitherto contested technology. Drawing on legitimacy theory, we show how proteomics scientists and organizations used standards as strategic tools to establish the legitimacy of this postgenomic field and affirm that proteomics can generate verifiable and reproducible results, thereby establishing it as a legitimate scientific field. Notably, legitimacy can be leveraged, at the same time, to maximize political power vis-à-vis other fields of science and as such embodies power relationships. These data collectively inform the broader context, in which postgenomic innovations emerge and legitimize, both technically and politically, through standards making. These findings have relevance for the design of next generation technology policies by demonstrating that standards are not "just" standards or neutral constructs but also tools to leverage political power of and by science and innovation actors, as shown in this case study of the emerging early phase of proteomics from 2011 to 2015.
Omics : a journal of integrative biology, Jun 25, 2016
Proteomics is one of the pivotal next-generation biotechnologies in the current "postgenomic... more Proteomics is one of the pivotal next-generation biotechnologies in the current "postgenomics" era. Little is known about the ways in which innovative proteomics science is navigating the complex socio-political space between laboratory and society. It cannot be assumed that the trajectory between proteomics laboratory and society is linear and unidirectional. Concerned about public accountability and hopes for knowledge-based innovations, funding agencies and citizens increasingly expect that emerging science and technologies, such as proteomics, are effectively translated and disseminated as innovation in society. Here, we describe translation strategies promoted in the knowledge translation (KT) and science communication literatures and examine the use of these strategies within the field of proteomics. Drawing on data generated from qualitative interviews with proteomics scientists and ethnographic observation of international proteomics conferences over a 5-year perio...
New Genetics and Society, 2016
Focaal, 2006
This article explores the lack of controversy over genetically modified objects (GMOs) in the dai... more This article explores the lack of controversy over genetically modified objects (GMOs) in the daily life of a research laboratory in Canada. Scientific perceptions of GMOs and the types of knowledge valued in scientific research contribute toward an absence of discussion on the wider social implications of GMOs. Technical and epistemic knowledge are crucial for the success of a scientific project, whereas discussion of the social values involved may be allocated to particular settings, people, or research stages. GMOs, within scientific circles, are seen as many individual projects with different goals, rather than as a single object. Therefore, according to this view, it is inappropriate to be opposed to or to support GMOs in general, without first ascertaining the specifics of a particular project. How then are scientists engaged in seemingly local, distinct projects seen as globally defending this technology? Scientific expertise unevenly translates into political voice, transfor...
Proteomics is one of the pivotal next-generation biotechnologies in the current “postgenomics” er... more Proteomics is one of the pivotal next-generation biotechnologies in the current “postgenomics” era. Little is known about the ways in which innovative proteomics science is navigating the complex socio-political space between laboratory and society. It cannot be assumed that the trajectory between proteomics laboratory and society is linear and unidirectional. Concerned about public accountability and hopes for knowledge-based innovations, funding agencies and citizens increasingly expect that emerging science and technologies, such as proteomics, are effectively translated and disseminated as innovation in society. Here, we describe translation strategies promoted in the knowledge translation (KT) and science communication literatures and examine the use of these strategies within the field of proteomics. Drawing on data generated from qualitative interviews with proteomics scientists and ethnographic observation of international proteomics conferences over a 5-year period, we found that proteomics science incorporates a variety of KT strategies to reach knowledge users outside the field. To attain the full benefit of KT, however, proteomics scientists must challenge their own normative assumptions and approaches to innovation dissemination—beyond the current paradigm relying primarily on publication for one's scientific peers within one's field—and embrace the value of broader (interdisciplinary) KT strategies in promoting the uptake of their research. Notably, the Human Proteome Organization (HUPO) is paying increasing attention to a broader range of KT strategies, including targeted dissemination, integrated KT, and public outreach. We suggest that increasing the variety of KT strategies employed by proteomics scientists is timely and would serve well the omics system sciences community.
Richard Lewontin proposed that the ability of a scientific field to create a narrative for public... more Richard Lewontin proposed that the ability of a scientific field to create a narrative for public understanding garners it social relevance. This article applies Lewontin’s conceptual framework of the functions of science (manipulatory and explanatory) to compare and explain the current differences in perceived societal relevance of genetics/genomics and
proteomics. We provide three examples to illustrate the social relevance and strong cultural narrative of genetics/genomics for which no counterpart exists for proteomics. We argue that the major difference between genetics/genomics and proteomics is that genomics has a strong explanatory function,
due to the strong cultural narrative of heredity. Based on qualitative interviews and observations of proteomics conferences, we suggest that the nature of proteins, lack of public understanding, and theoretical complexity exacerbates this difference for proteomics. Lewontin’s framework suggests
that social scientists may find that omics sciences affect social relations in different ways than past analyses of genetics.
Sociologias, 2008
Biotechnology and plant genetic engineering hold strong appeal in Colombia, due to the technology... more Biotechnology and plant genetic engineering hold strong appeal in Colombia, due to the technology's potential to enable participation in the new knowledge economy and as a way of harnessing the country's great biodiversity. However, genetic engineering technology ...
Culture & Agriculture, 2009
The essays in this volume study the creation, adaptation, and use of science and technology in La... more The essays in this volume study the creation, adaptation, and use of science and technology in Latin America. They challenge the view that scientific ideas and technology travel unchanged from the global North to the global South--the view of technology as “imported magic”. They not only describe alternate pathways for innovation, invention, and discovery, but also how ideas and technologies circulate in Latin American contexts and transnationally. The contributors’ explorations of these issues, and their examination of specific Latin American experiences with science and technology, offer a broader, more nuanced understanding of how science, technology, politics, and power interact in the past and present. The essays in this book use methods from history and the social sciences to investigate forms of local creation and use of technologies; the circulation of ideas, people, and artifacts in local and global networks; and hybrid technologies and forms of knowledge production. The essays address such topics as the work of female forensic geneticists in Colombia; the pioneering Argentinean use of fingerprinting technology in the late nineteenth century; the design, use, and meaning of the XO Laptops created and distributed by the One Laptop per Child Program; and the development of nuclear energy in Argentina, Mexico, and Chile.