Journal of Science and Technology Studies (과학기술학연구)

Korean Association of Science and Technology Studies (한국과학기술학회)
권호 표지

The Ethical Regime and Technological Citizenship in Software Oriented Society

SW(소프트웨어)중심사회의 윤리적 체제와 기술 시티즌십

  • Received : 2015.11.29
  • Accepted : 2015.12.20
  • Published : 2015.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Digital inclusion is the ability or opportunities of individuals and groups to access and use information technology (IT). Digital inclusion strategies aims to ensure that all citizens regardless of their gender, race and class benefit from IT. Discourse of digital inclusion is notable in that it proposes a desirable relationship between the state, individuals, and the market within the shifting topology of technoscience. Throughout broad discourse analysis of media coverages, in-depth interviews and reports on Korean IT industry, this research argues that dialogues on digital inclusion have substantially influenced the formation of a specific ethical regime. In this regime, individuals should become subjects embodying IT expertise and acceptable codes of conducts. We further discuss that such government-driven ethical regime conflicts with technological citizenship practiced by IT experts and semi-experts. We make theoretical contribution to STS by expanding the concept of technological citizenship to include the rights and obligations of heterogeneous expert and semi-expert groups to form, propose and socially demand alternative developmental pathways of technoscience. We also note that, amid the conflict between ethical regime and technological citizenship, alternative interpretations of gender gap can be forged, providing competing perspectives on women's under-representation and labor conditions in the IT industry. Further research is required to capture the emergence of multiple identities--differentiated by gender, race, class, and more--within the clashing interface between the ethical regime and technological citizenship.

디지털 참여(digital inclusion)는 모든 시민이 지식정보사회에 참여할 수 있는 기회 또는 역량의 확산을 가리키는 개념으로 세계 각국에서 주요한 IT 정책 목표로 설정되고 있다. 디지털 참여 담론은 단순히 새로운 과학기술의 경제적 중요성을 강조하는 것을 넘어 변화하는 과학기술 지형에서 국가, 개인, 그리고 시장의 이상적인 관계를 새로이 제시하고 있다는 면에서 주목할 만하다. 이 연구는 다양한 담론 분석을 통해, 정보화 시대에 개인이 기술적 전문성과 전문가다운 의식을 가진 주체가 됨으로써 국가 발전에 기여해야 한다는 윤리적 체제(ethical regime)가 한국의 디지털 참여 담론 주위로 형성되고 있다고 주장한다. 또한 국가 주도의 윤리적 체제가 IT 준/전문가들의 기술 시티즌십과 충돌하면서 갈등을 일으키며, 이 때 여성의 IT 산업 내 과소대표와 노동에 대한 대안적 해석이 발생함을 지적한다. 우리는 윤리적 체제와 기술 시티즌십이 충돌하는 지점에서, 젠더화, 계층화된 정체성이 발현되는 현상에 주목하는 것이 중요하며 앞으로 그 한계와 발전 가능성에 대한 더 많은 연구가 수행되어야 함을 제안한다. 나아가 이 연구는 기술 시티즌십이라는 개념을 사회의 다양한 계층의 이종적 정체성이 동적으로 구성되는 과정에 적용함으로써 일반 시민에 주로 적용되던 이 분석틀의 확장을 도모하고자 한다.

Keywords

References

  1. 고용노동부 (각 연호), 고용형태별근로실태조사 보고서
  2. 구도완 (2013), 환경사회학의 쟁점, 경제와사회, 제100호, pp. 273-91.
  3. 김기흥 (2012), 동아시아 생명과학의 발전과 바이오시민권의 형성가능성, 아시아리뷰, 제2권 제2호, pp. 43-63.
  4. 김영옥 (2001), 여성 IT 인력의 현황과 잠재력 분석, 한국여성학, 제17권 제2호, pp. 5-34.
  5. 김지연 (2015), 국가정보화법 속의 시민: 좋은 거버넌스를 향해, 비판사회학회 발표.
  6. 김지형.김효민 (2014), 과학기술 젠더 불균형: 현황과 과제, 과학기술학연구, 제14권 제2호, pp. 251-80.
  7. 김태은 (2013), 여성과 ICT에 대한 국제적 논의의 추이와 함의, 방송통신정책, 제25권 제6호, pp. 1-24.
  8. 박순열 (2010), 한국 생태시티즌십(ecologial citizenship) 인식유형에 관한 경험적 연구, 환경사회학연구 ECO, 제14권 제2호, pp. 7-52.
  9. 성지은 (2003), 정보통신산업의 정책진화: 이동통신사업자 선정사례를 중심으로, 한국행정학보, 제37권 제2호, pp. 333-353.
  10. 소프트웨어정책연구소 (2014), 2014 소프트웨어 산업 실태조사 분석 연구, 미래창조과학부.
  11. 이경남 (2013), ICT 부문 여성 인력 현황 및 시사점, 방송통신정책, 25(14): 1-23.
  12. 이경선.최충.이경남.송헌재 (2014), ICT 산업 내에서 성별임금격차 분석, 정보통신정책연구원 연구보고서.
  13. 이경선.나성현.이경남.최충 (2014), ICT 여성인력 고용현황 및 고용률 제고방안 연구, 정보통신정책연구원 연구보고서.
  14. 이영희 (2014), 과학기술 시티즌십의 두 유형과 전문성의 정치: 과학기술 대중화 정책과 '차일드세이브'의 활동을 중심으로, 동향과 전망, 제92호, pp. 174-211.
  15. 여성과학기술인지원센터 (2014), 2013년도 여성과학기술인력 활용 실태조사 보고서, 미래창조과학부.
  16. 한국정보화진흥원 (2011), 2011 국가정보화백서, 한국정보화진흥원.
  17. 홍덕화.이영희(2014), 한국의 에너지 운동과 에너지 시티즌십: 유형과 특징, 환경사회학연구 ECO, 제18권 제1호, pp. 7-44.
  18. Chakravartty, P., & Sarkar, S. (2013), "Entrepreneurial justice: The new spirit of capitalism in emergent India", Popular Communication, Vol. 11(1), pp. 58-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2013.747941
  19. Cooper, M. (2000), "Being the "go-to guy": fatherhood, masculinity and the organization of work in Silicon Valley", Qualitative Sociology, Vol. 23(4), pp. 379-405. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005522707921
  20. Cussins, C. (1996), "Ontological choreography: Agency through objectification in infertility clinics", Social Studies of Science, Vol. 26(3), pp. 575-610. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631296026003004
  21. Dasgupta, S. (2008), "Success, market, ethics: Information technology and the shifting politics of governance and citizenship in the Indian silicon plateau", Cultural Dynamics, Vol. 20(3), pp. 213-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0921374008096310
  22. Edwards, P. (1990), "The army and the microworld: Computers and the militarized politics of gender", Signs, Vol. 16(1), pp. 102-27. https://doi.org/10.1086/494647
  23. Epstein, S. (1993) Impure science; AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge, University of California Press.
  24. Faulkner, W. (2004), Strategies of inclusion: Gender and the information society, Final Report, Univeristy of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland.
  25. Frankenfeld, P. (1992), "Technological citizenship: A normative framework for risk studies", Science, Technology & Human Values Vol. 17(4), pp. 459-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399201700403
  26. Hacker, S. (1989), Pleasure, power, and technology: some tales of gender, engineering, and the cooperative workplace, Routledge.
  27. Helsper, E. (2011), The emergence of a digital underclass: digital policies in the UK and evidence for inclusion LSE Media Policy Project Series, Sally M., Zoetanya S., and Tambini, D. (eds) Media policy brief 3. Department of media and communications, London School of Economics and Political Science.
  28. Irani, L. (2015), "Hackathons and the Making of Entrepreneurial Citizenship", Science Technology and Human Values, Vol. 40(5), pp. 799-824. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915578486
  29. Irwin, A. (1995), Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development, London: Routledge.
  30. Irwin A (2001), "Constructing the scientific citizen: Science and democracy in the biosciences", Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 10(1), pp. 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/10/1/301
  31. Irwin A & Wynne B (1996), Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  32. Jasanoff, S. (2005), Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  33. Jasanoff, S. & Kim, S. (2009), "Containing the atom: Sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea", Minerva, Vol. 47(2), pp. 119-146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-009-9124-4
  34. Kendall, L. (1999), "The nerd within: Mass media and the negotiation of identity among computer-using men", Journal of Men's Studies, Vol. 99(7), 353-367.
  35. Kendall, L. (2000), "'Oh no! I'm a nerd!': Hegemonic masculinity on an online forum", Gender and Society, Vol. 14(2), pp. 256-274. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124300014002003
  36. Largesen, V. (2007), "The Strength of Numbers: Strategies to Include Women into Computer Science", Social Studies of Science, Vol. 37(1), pp. 67-92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312706063788
  37. Latour, B. (1987), Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society, Harvard University Press
  38. Latour, B. (2003), "What If We Talked Politics a Little?," Contemporary Political Theory, Vol. 2(2), pp. 143-164. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.cpt.9300092
  39. Law, J. (1987), Technology and heterogeneous engineering: The case of Portuguese Expansion. In W. e. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, & T. J. Pinch (eds.), The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology (pp. 111-134). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  40. Livingstone, S. & Helsper, E. (2007), "Gradations in digital inclusion: children, young people and the digital divide", New Media and Society, Vol. 9(4). pp. 671-696. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807080335
  41. Margolis, J. and Fisher, A. (2002), Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  42. Marshall, T. (1950), Citizenship and Social Class in Citizenship Debates: A Reader ed. by Gershon Shafir, Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press.
  43. McKinsey & Company (2010), Women at the top of corporations: Making it happen, Women Matter report.
  44. Mouffe, Chantal (1992), "Democratic citizenship and the political community", in Chantal Mouffe ed. Dimensions of Radical Democracy: Pluralism, Citizenship , Community, London: Verso.
  45. Ong, A. & Collier, S. (2008), Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics, and Ethics as Anthropological Problems, Malden Blackwell.
  46. Oudshoorn, N., Rommes, E., and Stienstra, M. (2004), "Configuring the User as Everybody: Gender and Design Cultures in Information and Communication Technologie", Science, Technology and Human Values, Vol. 29(1), pp. 30-63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243903259190
  47. Pickering, A. (2005), "Synthetic dyes and social theory", Perspectives on Science, Vol. 13(3), pp. 352-405. https://doi.org/10.1162/106361405774287955
  48. Pinch, T. & Bijker, W. (1984), "The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology might benefit each other", Social Studies of Science, Vol. 14, pp. 339-441.
  49. Rommes, E., van Slooten I., van Oost, E. and Oudshoorn, N. (2004), Designing Inclusion: The development of ICT products to include women in the Information Society, Trondheim, Centre for Technology and Society, NTNU.
  50. Sorensen, K. H., Faulkner, W. & Rommes, E. W. M. (2011), Technologies of Inclusion: Gender in the Information Society. Trondheim, Tapir Akademisk Forlag.
  51. Sorensen, K. H. (2004). Gender and inclusion policies for the information society, Trondheim, Centre for Technology and Society, NTNU.
  52. Traweek, S. (1988) Beamtimes and Lifetimes: The World of High Energy Physics, Cambridge, Harvard University Press
  53. Turkle, S. (1984), The second self: Computers and the human spirit, New York, Simon and Schuster.
  54. Turner, B. and Hamilton, P. (1994), (eds) Citizenship: Critical Concepts, London; Routledge.
  55. Winner, L. (1980), "Do artifacts have politics?", Daedalus, Vol. 109(1), pp. 121-136.
  56. Woodhouse, E. and Patton, J. (2004), "Design by Society: Science and Technology Studies and the Social Shaping of Design", Design Issues, Vol. 20(3), pp. 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1162/074793604871338