' This is just a buzzword' is a common claim for accusing hype and little substance (p. 240). Sometimes, even mere prefixes like 'nano', 'smart', 'quantum', 'cloud', or 'green' generate enough attention to motivate investors, governments, and researchers alike to act now and shape innovation or not miss out on what everyone else is talking about (p. 247). Therefore, one could say that it is the increasing dissemination and popularity of buzzwords that calls things like 'cloud computing' or 'green chemistry' into being. But the question remains – buzzwords call what into being?

According to Bensaude Vincent, buzzwords stand on a "well-understood misunderstanding" (p. 245): Like "boundary objects" (Star & Griesmer, 1989), buzzwords are "robust because they allow interpretive flexibility while being recognizable enough to enable people to translate and adapt them to their niches" (p. 246). And as such, buzzwords have the power to "assemble people and create grand narratives that shape the cultural landscape for a few years" (p. 248). Even if or perhaps precisely because buzzwords bear little meaning, they are valuable means to generate attention for various projects and establish transactional spaces. This makes the concept all the more important for understanding innovation dynamics with regard to hype & overpromising.

Bensaude Vincent's empirical focus on the trio of "sustainable development", "responsible innovation", and "public engagement” (p. 242) is convincing and, in my opinion, can also be read as a self-criticism of the inclusion-oriented but often vaguely defined concepts in the Science Technology Studies (STS). At the same time, the article shows similarities to Arie Rip & Jan-Peter Voß (2013) study on “umbrella terms” but sheds light on the creation of buzz and to Andreas Lösch (2006) study on “visionary images” as boundary objects in nanotechnology but highlighting the enrichment of meaning without figurative imagination (p. 246). Thus, anyone interested in the emergence of topicality and networks but also a self-critical reflection on hype should read this paper.

References

Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional Ecology, `Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001

Lösch, A. (2006). Anticipating the futures of nanotechnology: Visionary images as means of communication. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(3–4), 393–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320600777168

Rip, A., & Voß, J.-P. (2013). Umbrella terms as mediators in the governance of emerging science and technology. https://doi.org/10.14279/depositonce-4480