In An Expedition Between Innovation Politics and Anthropology, Torbjörn Friberg systematically discusses and analyses several specific political phenomena, which are later drawn together to deliberate the general notion of ideology, power, and possible anthropological escape routes in the context of innovation politics. Drawing on fieldwork in the innovation political world (policy model, mediator company, networks, meetings, conferences, events, documents, observations, and interviews), Friberg reconsiders and develops the work of Laura Nader, Manuel DeLanda, Marilyn Strathern, Martin Holbraad, William Graham Sumner, Pierre Bourdieu, Ghassan Hage, and Eric Wolf. In line with this reasoning, Friberg considers the innovation political world as constituted by a new form of structural power and ideology: a political context in which the anthropological world becomes encapsulated by political processes.

The article attempts to elucidate tensionless ethnography against the backdrop of three contemporary processes: STS ethnography, innovation policies, and the Mode 2 society. An ethnographic approach was utilized to generate the initial problem of the ‘tensionless’, which is continuously resolved by close readings of research literature and documents on innovation policies. Tensionless ethnography is described as a method in which the conceptual objects and attitude are conceived as similar among the ethnographer and the Others. As the academic world of ethnography becomes an assimilated part of the world of policy and industry, it could be argued that we are about to lose a self-reflexive qualitative approach. Therefore, it seems urgent to re-establish an ethnographic world in which we can exercise critical inquires in innovation policy.

This article is concerned with Ghassan Hage’s dialectics of anthropological critique—constituted by the tension between modernism and primitivism. Hage argues that modernethnographers who encounter other primitivist worlds become equipped with potential criticalthinking about politico-organisational matters of modernity. So far, so good. However, whatif there is a crisis of modernity, in the sense that “modern” political projects are inspired byprimitivism? As Strathern emphasises today, there seems to be a problem of pursuing the dialecticsof anthropological critique concerning the new imperialistic tendencies “at home”. Such a problem,I argue, can be observed by the emergence of the world of innovation politics that is constitutedby a form of primitivism. This leads to the question, How can we maintain the dialectics ofanthropological critique in the context of innovation politics? This article aims to explore thedialectics of anthropological critique by placing it in a dynamic, capitalist modern context

This article focuses on the intrinsic potential of ethnographic critique challenged inthe context of innovation political projects equipped with the harmonizing Triple Helix model.An ethnographic approach has been used to generate the initial problem of harmonization,which is discussed in relation to Henry Etzkowitz’ textual assumptions on harmonizationin the Triple Helix model, followed by two ethnographic cases concerned with the practicesof harmonization. Harmonization is described as making consistent different provinces ofmeaning or worlds, unrestricting them from conflicting structures of relevance. Therefore,the concluding remarks attempt to broaden the scope of critical ethnographic strategieswith the help of a Weberian differentiation between a political and a social scientific world.

The purpose of this qualitative inquiry is to attempt to elucidate the policy attitude as it appears within the context of scientific innovation. A phenomenological anthropological approach to qualitative inquiry was utilized in order to explicate the human scientific meaning of a specific attitude driven by an interest in a sociocultural context. The policy attitude can be described as an attitude upholding a meaning based upon a collaborative ideal, marked by a hybridization of values and organizations. The policy attitude is thus submissive to political trends and business organizational structures, goals, and objectives. As the world of science becomes an integrated part of the world of policy and industry, it could be argued that policy attitude influences how we perceive knowledge, in which qualitative inquiry in the human sciences is by no means excluded.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to outline the operative meaning of collaboration in a life science network. Design/methodology/approach: Data were collected through participatory observations and interviews between 2014 and 2015. The data presented were derived from field notes from participant observations, interviews and documents within a life science network in the Öresund region (southern part of Sweden and the Copenhagen area). Findings: The findings suggest that collaboration within the life science network should be viewed as a lively, organizational assembly in the process of becoming, in contrast to the idea that it is operating on the basis of organic principles. Collaboration thus could be viewed as consisting of self-subsistent parts (participants and organizations) that are detached and plugged into different collaborative networks. Originality/value: In the context of the emerging idea of re-building the state welfare system with the economic support of producing and selling knowledge, there seems to be a growing interest, especially from the point of view of policymakers, in the phenomenon of collaboration. This paper offers exclusive ethnographic illustrations into the heterogeneity of collaboration.

Artikeln syftar till att avtäcka de harmoniseringsprocesser som utgår från Trippelhelixmodellen. Detta för att öka medvetenheten om kritiskt motstånd bland universitetslärare. Då denna policymodell har som intention att söka harmonisera olikartade världar – universitetet, industrin och staten – är det relevant att studera dessa processer både textuellt och praktiskt. Artikelns kunskapsproduktion utgår från ett etnografiskt angreppssätt, som en generativ källa till det fenomen som undersöks (dvs. harmonisering utefter Trippelhelix-modellen). Mot bakgrund av det framväxande Mode 2-samhället pekar resultaten på policymakarnas möjligheter till att avväpna kritiskt motstånd. Implikationerna av denna analys visar på ett möjligt kritiskt motstånd för framtida universitetslärare.

The purpose of this article is to disclose the harmonisation processes that take their point of departure in the triple helix model of innovation, in order to increase awareness of critical resistance among university teachers. As this policy model intends to harmonise different sectors – universities, industry, and the state – it is relevant to study these processes both textually and practically. Knowledge production in this article is based on an ethnographic approach, as a generative source for the phenomenon under investigation (i.e., harmonisation according to the triple helix model). Against the backdrop of the emerging “Mode 2” society, the results outline policymakers’ prospects of disarming critical resistance. The implications of this analysis indicate possible critical resistance from future university teachers.

This article is a response to the methodological problems I experienced during fieldwork. It follows that the article is an experiment of creating alternative possibilities for thinking about ethnocentrism as a phenomenon in transformation in a contemporary, innovative, higher educational setting. Throughout the article, I argue for the acknowledgement of policy-centrism as a phenomenon that has transformed out of classic ethnocentrism. The first part provides a reflective ethnographic background, while the second part focuses on sociologist William Graham Sumner’s classical work in order to disclose the constitutive principles of ethnocentrism as a phenomenon. The three following parts will, thus, discuss the transformation of the phenomenon’s four overlapping principles: conceptual, political, relational and expressional. The concluding remarks problematise policy-centrism as an emerging phenomenon in the new innovation policy research context.