Engaging with engagement: Ethnographic sensitivity in the sociology of regimes of engagement

Abstract This article investigates an overlooked question: what kind of methodological sensitivity is necessary when using Laurent Thévenot's sociology of regimes of engagement (SRE) in ethnographic research? Thévenot's call to study proximate forms of engagement ‘below’ the public correlates with the recent turn to non-representational methodologies in ethnography. Thus, we discuss the methodological consequences of the ontological commitment of SRE through a dialogue with the epistemological arguments of non-representation, which we take to include sensory, affective, and embodied ethnographies. We do so by zooming in on three key aspects of SRE: plurality of different regimes of engagement, investment of people in their environment to secure goods, and versatility between trusting and doubtful engagements. We argue that while SRE and non-representational ethnography share a concern for unspoken, affective, and embodied practices, SRE requires a different sensitivity towards the dynamics between the representational and non-representational.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology
Published
2025-03-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1162/ecps_a_00004
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Geographies of human-animal interactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.72
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Engaging with engagement: Ethnographic sensitivity in the sociology of regimes of engagement

Marie Leth Meilvang, Christina Juhlin, Magnus Paulsen Hansen, Mathilde Hjerrild Carlsen
1 citations
European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology
Geographies of human-animal interactions
6.72
article

Engaging with engagement: Ethnographic sensitivity in the sociology of regimes of engagement

Marie Leth Meilvang, Christina Juhlin, Magnus Paulsen Hansen, Mathilde Hjerrild Carlsen
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract This article investigates an overlooked question: what kind of methodological sensitivity is necessary when using Laurent Thévenot's sociology of regimes of engagement (SRE) in ethnographic research? Thévenot's call to study proximate forms of engagement ‘below’ the public correlates with the recent turn to non-representational methodologies in ethnography. Thus, we discuss the methodological consequences of the ontological commitment of SRE through a dialogue with the epistemological arguments of non-representation, which we take to include sensory, affective, and embodied ethnographies. We do so by zooming in on three key aspects of SRE: plurality of different regimes of engagement, investment of people in their environment to secure goods, and versatility between trusting and doubtful engagements. We argue that while SRE and non-representational ethnography share a concern for unspoken, affective, and embodied practices, SRE requires a different sensitivity towards the dynamics between the representational and non-representational.

European Journal of Cultural and Political SociologyVol. 12(1)
Roskilde University (DK), Copenhagen Business School (DK), University College Lillebaelt (DK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Geographies of human-animal interactions
6.72
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.