Do Artifacts Have Political Economy?

Harking back to Langdon Winner's now classic essay “Do artifacts have politics?,” my aim in this article is to ask a very similar question—namely, do artifacts have political economy? Following Winner and with the same objective in mind, I analyze artifacts that: (1) have been designed in ways that embed particular political economies; or (2) are compatible with particular political economies. I illustrate the former using Winner's own example of Robert Moses and the design of bridges in New York City. For the latter, I illustrate a strong and weak version of the compatibility claim, with the strong version characterized by the adoption of both a particular technology and political economy while the weak version is characterized by the adaptation of the social context to a particular technology and political economy. I use the example of advertising technology (“adtech”) and generative artificial intelligence respectively to illustrate these two versions. I frame this discussion within an approach I define as constructivist political economy sitting at the interface of science and technology studies and political economy, which can provide a useful analytical tool to analyze and address the vagaries of contemporary technoscientific capitalism.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Science Technology & Human Values
Published
2025-08-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/01622439251352167
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Cybernetics and Technology in Society
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
36.05

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do Artifacts Have Political Economy?

Kean Birch
2 citations
Science Technology & Human Values
Cybernetics and Technology in Society
36.05
article

Do Artifacts Have Political Economy?

Kean Birch
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Harking back to Langdon Winner's now classic essay “Do artifacts have politics?,” my aim in this article is to ask a very similar question—namely, do artifacts have political economy? Following Winner and with the same objective in mind, I analyze artifacts that: (1) have been designed in ways that embed particular political economies; or (2) are compatible with particular political economies. I illustrate the former using Winner's own example of Robert Moses and the design of bridges in New York City. For the latter, I illustrate a strong and weak version of the compatibility claim, with the strong version characterized by the adoption of both a particular technology and political economy while the weak version is characterized by the adaptation of the social context to a particular technology and political economy. I use the example of advertising technology (“adtech”) and generative artificial intelligence respectively to illustrate these two versions. I frame this discussion within an approach I define as constructivist political economy sitting at the interface of science and technology studies and political economy, which can provide a useful analytical tool to analyze and address the vagaries of contemporary technoscientific capitalism.

Science Technology & Human Values
York University (CA)
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Cybernetics and Technology in Society
36.05
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.

Do Artifacts Have Political Economy? — Kean Birch · Science Technology & Human Values (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS