Standardisation and social ordering: A change of perspective


This article examines standardisation in synthetic biology as a form of social coordination and ordering. I discuss standardisation by exploring what makes standards possible, and offer an understanding based on infrastructures: technical and social systems that support the existence and operation of accepted standards. By exploring the role of social infrastructures, I contend that standards depend upon social ordering: ways of arranging people in particular positions, relations, and hierarchies. I suggest that synthetic biologists ought to develop an awareness of these social orders, take responsibility for their creation, and accept accountability for their consequences, both technical and social.


synthetic biology; standards; infrastructures; social orders; responsibility

Full Text:



  • Anderson, J. C., Dueber, J. E., Leguia, M., Wu, G. C., Goler, J. A., Arkin, A. P., & Keasling, J. D. (2010). BglBricks: A flexible standard for biological part assembly. Journal of Biological Engineering, 4(1).

  • Arkin, A. (2008). Setting the standard in synthetic biology. Nature Biotechnology, 26(7), 771–774.

  • Barnes, B. (2001). Practice as collective action. In T. Schatzki, K. Knorr Cetina, & E. von Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory (pp. 17–28). Routledge.

  • Canton, B., Labno, A., & Endy, D. (2008). Refinement and standardization of synthetic biological parts and devices. Nature Biotechnology, 26(7), 787–793.

  • Endy, D., & Arkin, A. (1999). A standard parts list for biological circuitry. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

  • Frow, E. K. (2013). Making big promises come true? Articulating and realizing the value of synthetic biology. BioSocieties, 8(4), 432–448.

  • Mutalik, V. K., Guimaraes, J. C., Cambray, G., Lam, C., Christoffersen, M. J., Mai, Q.-A., Tran, A. B., Paull, M., Keasling, J. D., Arkin, A. P., & Endy, D. (2013). Precise and reliable gene expression via standard transcription and translation initiation elements. Nature Methods, 10(4), 354–360.

  • Sauro, H. M. (2008). Modularity defined. Molecular Systems Biology, 4(1), 166.

  • Schaffer, S. (1999). Late Victorian metrology and its instrumentation: A manufactory of ohms. In M. Biagioli (Ed.), The science studies reader (pp. 457–478). Routledge.

  • Schyfter, P. (2015). Metrology and varieties of making in synthetic biology. In O. Schlaudt, & L. Huber (Eds.), Standardization in measurement: Philosophical, historical and sociological issues (pp. 25–38). Pickering & Chatto.

  • Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. The University of Chicago Press.

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge University Press.

Creative Commons License
Texts in the journal are –unless otherwise indicated– published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License