Was our sentence necessarily a misinterpretation? We might have simplified the thought, or interpreted it from our own perspective, but I feel like this wasn't a misinterpretation. 🤷

Calvert and Schyfter said "But by working with artists and designers instead of making studies of them, we can together start to develop an emergent form of critique, which could allow novel discussions and explorations of sociotechnical complexity, and perhaps bring something new into being."

But the paper discussed not just collaborations but also an emergent form of critique that can be developed from the collaborations. The authors were inspired by Michael (2012) who discussed "the process of emergence of new relations" from speculative design.

And the reviewer: "The paper cited here is Calvert and Schyfter (2017). But the sentence misrepresents the paper, which is about collaborations between STS researchers, artists and designers and synthetic biologists, not about speculating on new problems that could emerge from synthetic biology.

We wrote, "Multidisciplinary research on synthetic biology involves... perhaps even speculating on new problems that could emerge from new relations emerging from synthetic biology". We cited journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10....

The log for FOI requests to the ABC is here www.abc.net.au/about/freedo.... The request is 202425-082

Dr Jenny Molloy has projects looking at this supply chain particularly in the Global South. In a presentation she showed really cool projects with African researchers. www.ceb.cam.ac.uk/staff/dr-jen...