Modern societies are shaped more than ever by crises and the discourses surrounding them. Under the term ‘polycrisis’, “multiple and partly overlapping crises” (Horsbøl, 2022, p. 293) associated with a high level of complexity and conflict are discursively negotiated, foremost among them the already occurring and anticipated consequences of climate change. Within these  complex, overlapping and oftentimes conflicting discursive fields, institutions and individual actors increasingly face the challenge of implementing practices promoting sustainability on various levels. Simultaneously, the "necessities and goals of transformation" (Jaeger-Erben & Hielscher 2022, p. 140, translation by the author) to change production and consumption patterns and thereby counter ecological crises are currently being debated.

A phenomenon entangled in the discursive field of sustainability which has been garnering attention internationally — especially in educational research — is the so-called maker movement. Makerspaces, the central hubs of the movement, can be described as open workshops where people from diverse demographic backgrounds have the opportunity to realize project ideas involving a wide range of analog and digital tools and materials (Martin, 2015). Individuals and communities within and around makerspaces often adhere to certain values and mindsets, such as openness, inclusivity, and especially sustainability (see contributions in Baier et al., 2016). Furthermore, public discourses frequently attribute utopian potential to the maker scene, as shown by the discourse analysis of Hepp, Benz, and Simon (2021), which focused on the public discourse around the movement during the COVID pandemic. On the other hand, individual spaces at imes fall short of these ideals and potentials, particularly concerning their efforts toward sustainable practices (Kohtala, 2017). In sum, a high degree of ambivalence can be observed within the maker movement regarding the aforementioned values and principles, which is particularly evident in questions of sustainability.

In the dissertation project presented, the maker scene is approached as a social movement (Walter-Herrmann, 2013) in the context of which sustainability is continually negotiated. Following Gunzelmann (2019), these negotiations can be thought of as a multidirectional process: for one,  the movement as a social world participates in negotiations concerning the discourses around sustainability as they are constituted in multiple societal arenas (e.g. academe, politics, education) while on the other hand, negotiations take place among actors within the movement itself. Within this construct, subjectivation processes occur as actors engage with the discursive in their daily practices. Building on an understanding of subjectivation as the relational production or epigenesis of subjects (Ricken, 2019), primary aim of the dissertation project is to investigate to what extent and which subject positions related to aspects of sustainability are discursively negotiated within the maker movement, and how these are in turn met by subjects (e.g., accepted, reinterpreted, rejected, etc.). The foundational approach of this work, which seeks to explore and reconstruct discursive elements through practices (Macgilchrist, 2020 p. 33), places the practices of makers at the center of the analysis. The following research question and subquestions guide the project.

• How do processes of subjectivation take shape within the maker movement with regard to sustainability?  

• • How is sustainability negotiated in discursive practices within the maker movement?
  • How are subjects positioned or how do they position themselves within this framework?

After briefly outlining the theoretical and methodological considerations mentioned above, focusing on the specific adaptations of the heuristic tools of situational analysis, preliminary findings will be presented and discussed.

The research project follows the qualitative-exploratory paradigm and seeks to connect with praxeologically oriented discourse research. In the understanding adopted here, following Wrana & Langer (2007) discourse is not analysed as an isolated unit, but rather, „discursive practices are examined taking into account their situatedness and entanglements“ (paragraph 14, translation by the author). Following a poststructuralist-praxeological approach, discursive elements are therefore reconstructed through different data types, i.e. observed practices and captured in the context of the maker movement following a (discourse-)ethnographic approach (Macgilchrist 2020). Combining ethnographic research with the cartographic analytic toolkit of situational analysis as a discourse-sensitive extension of grounded theory (Clarke, 2005) data collection and analysis are alternated in an iterative, reflexive process. Situated practices that both generate the discourse on sustainability and reproduce and consolidate discursive formations around sustainability within the maker movement thereby form the analytical focus. As a primary method of data-collection, multi-sited focused ethnography (Knoblauch, 2001), specifically participant observation, is applied. Thereby, (micro-)practices in the daily operations in multiple makerspaces are observed in iterative phases of field research on-site. As is specific to focused ethnography, data collection takes place in certain concentrated phases, such as opening hours in the makerspaces or organizational meetings and includes ethnographic interviews with makers during those field visits. Field notes and observation protocols are compiled for each such phase. These on-site phases are supplemented by online-ethnographical observations in chat rooms. The sample consists of makerspaces in Germany without affiliation to an (educational) institution, such as a school or university. So as to ensure the possibility of observing situated (micro-)practices, these makerspaces were selected based on whether or not they offer opening hours during which makers can freely engage in making activities, as opposed to the activities being limited to workshops and classes offered. There have been multiple iterations of data collection and analysis phases already. In line with theoretical sampling, additional makerspaces are selected in an iterative and cyclical process of analysis and theorisation (Glaser & Strauss, 2017/1967). Data analysis is conducted using the analytical maps and coding techniques of situational analysis (Clarke, 2005) and adapting them to fit the specific requirements of the project. This approach, based on the theoretical and methodological underpinnings of symbolic interactionism and grounded theory, is particularly sensitive towards the discursive and supports multi-sited, heterogenous and complex fields of research, such as the maker movement.

The presentation will report on preliminary findings that can be gleaned from the iterations of data collection and analysis, which began in January 2025. After outlining the theoretical and methodological underpinnings as well as research questions and methods, first mappings of the research situation will be presented and discussed, giving an idea of the elements, relations, social worlds and arenas and positionalities (Clarke, 2005) involved. From these, a first outline of reconstructions of subjectivation processes can tentatively be drawn. To provide an outlook, the selected methods and research process will be reflected, along with possible implications for further sample-building.

Baier, A., Hansing, T., Müller, C., & Werner, K. (eds.). (2016). Die Welt reparieren: Open Source und Selbermachen als postkapitalistische Praxis. transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839433775 Clarke, A. E. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Sage Publications, Inc. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Routledge. (Original work published 1967) Gunzelmann, H. J. (2019). Diskurse, Konflikte und Macht: Eine Foucault’sche Perspektive auf Deutungskämpfe in sozialen Bewegungen. In Handbuch Poststrukturalistische Perspektiven auf soziale Bewegungen (S. 70–87). transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783839448793-005 Hepp, A., Benz, S., & Simon, P. (2021). Zwischen Utopie und Dystopie. Oder: Wie der öffentliche Diskurs über die Maker- und Quantified-Self-Bewegung in Deutschland und Großbritannien die Pioniergemeinschaften zu Treibern tiefgreifender Mediatisierung macht. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 69(2), 270–298. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2021-2-270 Jaeger-Erben, M., & Hielscher, S. (2022). Verhältnisse reparieren: Wie Reparieren und Selbermachen die Beziehungen zur Welt verändern. transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783839456989 Knoblauch, H. (2001). Fokussierte Ethnographie. Soziologie, Ethnologie und die neue Welle der Ethnographie. Sozialer Sinn, 2(1), 123–142. https://doi.org/10.1515/sosi-2001-0105 Kohtala, C. (2017). Making “Making” Critical: How Sustainability is Constituted in Fab Lab Ideology. The Design Journal, 20(3), 375–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2016.1261504. Macgilchrist, F. (2020). Praktiken. In Truschkat, I., Bormann, I., Biermann, J., Chehata, Y., Jergus, K., Kessl, F., Macgilchrist, F., Pfahl, L., Thon, C., & Wenzler, N. (2020). Einführung in die erziehungswissenschaftliche Diskursforschung: Forschungshaltung, zentrale Konzepte, Beispiele für die Durchführung (1. Auflage). Beltz Juventa. Martin, L. (2015). The Promise of the Maker Movement for Education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 5(1). https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1099. Ricken, N. (2019). Bildung und Subjektivierung. Bemerkungen zum Verhältnis zweier Theorieperspektiven. In Ricken, N., Casale, R., & Thompson, C. (eds.). (2019). Subjektivierung: Erziehungswissenschaftliche Theorieperspektiven (1. Auflage) (S. 95-118). Kommission Bildungs- und Erziehungsphilosophie der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Erziehungswissenschaft, Weinheim Basel. Beltz Juventa. Walter-Herrmann, J. (2013). FabLabs — A global social movement? In J. Walter-Herrmann & C. Büching (eds.), FabLab: Of Machines, Makers and Inventors (S. 33-46). Bielefeld: transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1515/transcript.9783839423820.33. Wrana, D., & Langer, A. (2007). An den Rändern der Diskurse. Jenseits der Unterscheidung diskursiver und nicht-diskursiver Praktiken. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol 8, No 2 (2007): From Michel Foucault’s Theory of Discourse to Empirical Discourse Research. https://doi.org/10.17169/FQS-8.2.253