Building with Nature BwN Guideline Environments Project phases Governance BwN Knowledge base
Networks Regulatory context Knowledge context Realization framework

Star and Griesmer (1989) introduced the ‘boundary object’ to deal with science as a heterogeneous activity, claiming that most scientific work is conducted by a diverse groups of involved people. Boundary work in that situation is used for ‘translating between viewpoints’ or ‘social worlds’. Boundary objects are defined as: ‘an analytic concept of those scientific objects which both inhabit several intersecting social worlds [. . .] and satisfy the informational requirements of each of them [. . .]. They have different meanings in different social worlds but their structure is common enough to more than one world to make them recognizable, a means of translation. The creation and management of boundary objects is a key process in developing and maintaining coherence across intersecting social worlds’’ (Star and Griesmer 1989; Turnhout 2009). Turnhout (2009) gives notice to the effectiveness of boundary objects. Following Bowker and Leigh Star (2000) Turnhout concludes that ambiguity and flexibility seem important characteristics of effectiveness for boundary objects and for ecological indicators. She concludes that effectiveness is context dependent: “boundary objects are able to connect only those social worlds that share common cultural values and preferences”. (Turnhout 2009)

Back to Top