Designing Controversies and Their Publics

Abstract

Twenty years ago, Bruno Latour conceived Controversy Mapping (CM) as a method to train students in the observation and description of sociotechnical debates. 1 Since then, CM has evolved considerably, not only because of the many universities that have adopted and adjusted it to their context, 2 but also because CM has become the pivot point of several international research projects. 3 Since the very beginning of this enterprise, it has been clear that the main challenge for the method was to engage with actors of the controversies. To be sure, CM is not a method of social intervention. Unlike crisis management or conflict resolution, it is not meant to solve or channel debates (nor does it assume such intervention is always desirable). Yet, as extensively shown in geography, maps are never neutral representations. 4 Cartography has always been a political tool and CM is not an exception. So, how could our tools and methods enhance democracy? What use will the public make of our maps? How can mapping improve the debate on science and technology?