Technologies are often presented and perceived as being inevitable, natural and necessary, as if they were the products of some inner logic. As a result, there has been a tendency in the past to focus on the effect or impact a technology has on society at the expense of investigating the origin of the technology. More recently, efforts have been made to penetrate the ‘black box’ of the technological artifact in order to reveal the variety of ways technologies are shaped. This paper will discuss the economic, political and other social factors which shaped the Australian Animal Health Laboratory and which determined its proposed functions.

PAGES
249 – 262
DOI
All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Issues
Also in this issue:
-
Agnes Horvath, Magic and the Will to Science: A Political Anthropology of Liminal Technicality
-
Gibson Burrell, Ronald Hartz, David Harvie, Geoff Lightfoot, Simon Lilley and Friends, Shaping for Mediocrity: The Cancellation of Critical Thinking at our Universities
-
Bas de Boer, How Scientific Instruments Speak: Postphenomenology and Technological Mediations in Neuroscientific Practice
-
Bjørn Lomborg, False Alarm
-
How does innovation arise in the bicycle sector? The users’ role and their betrayal in the case of the ‘gravel bike’
THE SOCIAL SHAPING OF A LABORATORY: THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE AUSTRALIAN ANIMAL HEALTH LABORATORY
Original Articles