{"id":13543,"date":"2026-07-24T10:34:13","date_gmt":"2026-07-24T08:34:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/?post_type=waterworlding&p=13543"},"modified":"2026-07-27T09:49:58","modified_gmt":"2026-07-27T07:49:58","slug":"worlding-waters","status":"publish","type":"waterworlding","link":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/waterworlding\/worlding-waters\/","title":{"rendered":"Worlding waters"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"

Formerly industrial water in a spectacular form (W. Dietzsch, 2025)<\/p><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

Worlding makes the story possible, but from the margins. (Tsing 2010, 57)\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In 2010,\u00a0Anna\u00a0Lowenhaupt\u00a0Tsing wrote\u00a0a seminal piece entitled\u00a0\u201cWorlding the Matsutake Diaspora or, can Actor-Network Theory experiment with holism\u201d\u00a0(Tsing 2010)\u00a0in which she operationalized the multifaceted theoretical concept of worlding\u00a0from a methodological perspective.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Taking worlding as a set of connected relations in perpetual motion and transformation,\u00a0she undertook\u00a0six\u00a0different analytical \u201cworlding exercises\u201d\u00a0to explore the\u00a0worldings\u00a0of the Matsutake mushroom. She\u00a0followed comparative\u00a0phylogeographical\u00a0methods, employed classical anthropological holism \u00e0 la Boas, reflected on her\u00a0own\u00a0expanded\u00a0version of Actor-Network Theory (ANT) and juxtaposed US-American\u00a0academic work\u00a0of\u00a0sustainability management style with the\u00a0different\u00a0worlding practices of Japanese scientists. Each exercise yields a different outcome of what the Matsutake mushroom is and what role it plays within the worlding process.\u00a0In doing so, her understanding of\u00a0worlding is not only concerned with the description of\u00a0worlds with all their logics and characteristics, but with what\u00a0emerges\u00a0when these worlds are created\u00a0in everyday life and how they change\u00a0in their constant interaction with others.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Through her worlding exercises, Anna Tsing also navigates theoretical questions of context and comparison. While she acknowledges that phylogeography and Latourian ANT have in common that they do not allow for discussion of context (ibid, 58) and that ANT in acts of self-purification \u201crids analysis\u201d from worlding exercises, she simultaneously refers to Marilyn Strathern and her \u201cexcessive use of <\/span>worlding<\/span>\u201d\u00a0(ibid,\u00a064).\u00a0Tsing\u00a0stated:\u00a0\u201cLatour refuses context.\u202fStrathern\u00a0disorients her readers by juxtaposing so many combinations of contextual relations that it becomes impossible for the reader to imagine the analysis only resting in only one set.\u201d (ibid,\u00a058).<\/span>\u202f<\/span>Sympathetic to the analytical value of both approaches, she positions herself between them by proposing a necessary but moderate way of including context in analysis and making (varying) \u201cpropositions about context\u201d (ibid, 49), as she demonstrates in her exercises.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In\u00a02015, Frida and Kirsten\u00a0Hastrup\u00a0<\/span>(Hastrup\u00a0and Hastrup 2015)<\/span>\u00a0prominently took up Tsing\u2019s ideas\u00a0about\u00a0worlds\u00a0and worlding\u00a0and linked them to water as a subject of research. As they noted at the time: \u201eThe very object of study \u2013 world-making projects in fluid environments\u00a0\u2013\u00a0is necessarily a result of empirical and analytical concern for a shared globe, to which ideas of settled and natural entities no longer apply.\u201d (2015,\u00a02) At a time of increasing acknowledgement of unstable, \u201cliquid worlds\u201d, as they called them\u00a0in reference\u00a0to Zygmunt Bauman\u2019s notion of \u201cliquid modernity\u201d (Bauman\u00a02000), they were\u00a0seeking to understand the role\u00a0water played in\u00a0\u201cthe making and unmaking\u201d of those fluid worlds\u00a0(Hastrup 2015).\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Much has changed since then.\u00a0While\u00a0the argument of fluid worlds\u00a0could initially\u00a0be read first and foremost as a critical commentary\u00a0on what\u00a0had previously been regarded as secure and fixed (solid), critical reflections have\u00a0since\u00a0suggested that this emphasis\u00a0also\u00a0carries\u00a0the\u00a0risk of diverting\u00a0attention away from\u00a0what remained untouched\u00a0by\u00a0or even actively resisted\u00a0such \u201cdissolutions\u201d.\u00a0Additionally, in 2022, Tim Ingold and\u00a0Cristi\u00e1n\u00a0Simonetti examined the presumed dichotomy between solid and fluid more closely and argued that this binary is, in fact, the wrong conceptual pair. \u201cSurely, what does not flow \u2013 what is stuck, or fixed firmly in place \u2013 is, ipso facto, solid. Yet curiously, all that is not solid\u00a0doesn\u2019t\u00a0flow.\u201d\u00a0(Ingold\/\u00a0Simonetti 2022,\u00a04)\u00a0They argue that much better terms\u00a0to pair\u00a0solidity\u00a0with\u00a0are \u201chollowness, contamination, planarity,\u00a0liquidity\u00a0and interruption\u201d and conclude \u201cthat matter\u00a0exists as continuous flux. It is both solid and fluid\u201d.\u00a0And\u00a0they\u00a0add:\u00a0\u201c[L]iquid\u00a0is fluid only when it runs, and it will not run if\u00a0contained. And in the case of duration, solidity and fluidity are not\u00a0opposed at all, but mutually implicated.\u201d (ibid,\u00a05)\u00a0This\u00a0makes the worlding of waters much more complicated, but also more interesting for ethnographic analysis because\u00a0it\u00a0has to\u00a0consider\u00a0more than just\u00a0flows, fluidities, viscosities, processes and practices of solidification\u00a0\u2013 in other words,\u00a0everything that\u00a0still\u00a0implicates the binary of fluidity and solidity.\u00a0Water might assume\u00a0different\u00a0roles\u00a0within each worlding process \u2014 sometimes a resource, sometimes a central actor, sometimes stripped of its defining properties to the point of unrecognizability, but always entangled with someone, something.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"

Creation of the text I (I. Dietzsch 2026)<\/p><\/div>\n

What becomes clear at this point at the latest is that\u00a0waterworlding\u00a0is\u00a0a\u00a0critical engagement with\u00a0<\/span>categorizations<\/span><\/i>,\u00a0<\/span>boundaries<\/span><\/i>,\u00a0<\/span>spatializations<\/span><\/i>,\u00a0<\/span>temporalities<\/span><\/i>, and\u00a0<\/span>scaling<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>In the following, I would like to build on this by offering some ideas for the space of thought and experimentation that this blog can\u00a0open up:<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Let us begin by working on\u00a0<\/span>categorisations<\/span><\/i>. When is water what, and how?\u00a0Which\u00a0different kinds\u00a0of water can be\u00a0identified\u00a0empirically; which\u00a0situations can be\u00a0observed\u00a0and described as moments of encounter,\u00a0negotiation\u00a0or coexistence between such\u00a0different kinds\u00a0of water;\u00a0and what kind of\u00a0wor(l)ding makes sense in this context? For example, when I speak here of\u00a0different kinds\u00a0of water, I do not simply mean different understandings of water but a fundamental recognition of ontologically distinct kinds of water.\u00a0Is wetness a state of water, or is water a state of wetness \u2013 and might not both be true at the same time? Is water alive?\u00a0Does water have to be physically present\u00a0in order to\u00a0be water? When and how is water\u00a0H<\/span>2<\/span>O,\u00a0what qualities are attributed to it in this context, and which worlds gather around it? A telling example of such questions \u2013 which may at first seem highly theoretical but are socially relevant \u2013 can be explored\u00a0in the chapter\u00a0\u201eWhat comes after water?\u201d\u00a0from\u00a0Jamie\u00a0Wang\u2019s\u00a0ethnography of Singapore as a more-than-human city\u00a0(Wang 2024).\u00a0In it, she describes the introduction of a new drinking water strategy that relies heavily on desalination.\u00a0\u201cNEWater\u201d,\u00a0by now\u00a0\u201ca dominant mode of water provision\u201d\u00a0(ibid,\u00a0120)\u00a0is a phenomenon\u00a0whose feasibility, however,\u00a0represents\u00a0less a solution to urban drinking water problems\u00a0than, above all, a\u00a0driver for the further growth of water-intensive large-scale industries.\u00a0\u201cNEWater has been tested as being well within WHO standards for drinking water and accepted as such by Singaporeans\u201d,\u00a0but\u00a0\u201conly one percent of it is actually blended into the reservoir as potable water\u201d\u00a0(ibid,\u00a0123).\u00a0This\u00a0\u201ctechnological water\u201d,\u00a0however, gives rise\u00a0to a new ontology that radically breaks with notions of water as nature. Wang also refers here to\u00a0<\/span>\u201cdecoupled\u00a0water<\/span>\u201c, \u201ca water imaginary that seeks to separate, extract, and produce water in an eco-modernized sense\u201d\u00a0(ibid,\u00a0120).<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

When we set out to explore the\u00a0<\/span>boundaries<\/span><\/i>\u00a0of categorisation, questions arise as to where water begins and where it ceases to be water. Can water, in the form of a river, be a person? What about the ontological status of traces, archaeological references or calculations suggesting that water might exist or have existed on other planets? Is water that has\u00a0been transformed\u00a0into data still water?\u00a0Who exercises interpretative power in which context, and what is the point of reference in doing so?\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In my own research\u00a0(Dietzsch\u00a02020), I have described water as a circulating reference (Latour). This concept helps us understand how water\u00a0remains\u00a0stable across various transformations during which its material qualities may constantly change. The concept of\u00a0the circulating reference makes it possible to describe precisely what and who is involved, but also which rules and conditions must be met for this to happen. Whether in paper form, depicted visually as text and tables, or in the form of digital data, water is transformed into \u201cimmutable mobiles\u201d (Latour 2009)\u00a0and thus becomes transportable across vast geographical distances. It circulates through various situations, ontologies or scales, holding things together or letting them go again, bringing together all the actors (hydrological and experiential knowledge, pipes, experts, cables, vessels and storage\u00a0spaces, technologically generated sensor data, observational data \u201cenhanced\u201d with the aid of technology, data from real-time monitoring, etc.) that its network requires in order to be recognised as water.\u00a0With its variable materiality, the circulating reference thus also\u00a0determines\u00a0its own boundaries of meaning. The reference to water also circulates in digital data worlds, where it\u00a0encounters\u00a0and mixes with data from other\u00a0circulating\u00a0references (e.g. data on energy consumption, weather\u00a0data\u00a0or stock market prices).\u00a0At this point, another insight from Tsing\u2019s concept of worlding comes into play. She does not confine herself to examining specific practices of creating different\u00a0worlds but\u00a0also looks at worlding through \u201cencounters\u201d in which the potentials,\u00a0limits\u00a0and partiality inherent in each form of worlding become visible. Thus, in her analytical exploration of worlding exercises, she is seeking points of connection as well as chains of translation (in an ANT sense).<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"

Creation of the text II (I. Dietzsch 2026)<\/p><\/div>\n

A look at the\u00a0<\/span>spatialities\u00a0<\/span><\/i>of\u00a0waterworlds\u00a0leads us to ask\u00a0a number of\u00a0more questions: Where can we\u00a0identify\u00a0„sites“ or „scapes“ of interest for ethnographic\u00a0waterworlding, and in what relations (e.g. waterscapes) are they connected to others?\u00a0Can we follow the water (Marcus 1995)? Is it a \u201cmoving target\u201d (Welz\u00a01988)?\u00a0Which skills are\u00a0required of\u00a0ethnographers in this context? But also:\u00a0In which spatialisations\u00a0does water play a decisive role: e.g. rivers, which\u00a0Dilip\u00a0da Cunha describes as an expression of ontological violence (da\u00a0Cunha\u00a02018), or oceans, which have become a\u00a0method in their own right\u00a0(Menon et al. 2022)?\u00a0Or: What are the consequences of thinking in terms of watery bodies or watery beings as opposed to bodies of water?\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In her hydrofeminist worlding, Astrida Neimanis constructs an ontology of bodies connected through water, entangled in complex relationships of gifts, theft and debt with other \u201cwatery life\u201d: <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cBlood, bile, intracellular fluid; a small ocean swallowed, a wild wetland in our gut; rivulets forsaken making their way from our insides to out, from watery womb to watery world: we are bodies of water. [\u2026]\u00a0 We are \u2013 made mostly of wet matter [\u2026] Given the various interconnected and anthropogenically exacerbated water crises that our planet currently faces \u2013 from drought and freshwater shortage to wild weather, floods, and chronic contamination \u2013 this meaningful mattering of our bodies is also an urgent question of worldly survival. [\u2026] I reimagine embodiment from the perspective of our bodies\u2019 wet constitution, as inseparable from these pressing ecological questions.\u201d\u00a0(Neimanis\u00a02017,\u00a01)<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The spatial perspective here is a network dominated by connections, the boundaries of which are of little significance. In this worlding, demarcations and categorisations are politics of retention and flow (Neimanis\u00a02017).\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

With the discourse on the Anthropocene,\u00a0time as an analytical category has also come under scrutiny. Instead of speaking of time or age,\u00a0we now tend to talk about\u00a0<\/span>temporalities<\/span><\/i>: When I\u00a0first heard a \u201cwater worker\u201d say, in conversation, that the water we were discussing was\u00a0very old, I was confused.\u00a0How does thinking in terms of water cycles \u2013 and\u00a0the\u00a0common\u00a0argument that water cannot be used up but\u00a0can\u00a0\u201conly\u201d become unusable for humans\u00a0\u2013 fit in with definitions of \u201cold\u201d water? Interestingly,\u00a0a hydrological experiment at ETH Zurich is currently investigating this by studying water in forest soil.\u00a0ETH presents the project as follows:\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cOver the past five years, soil water samples have been\u00a0<\/span>analysed\u00a0<\/span>for stable isotopes every week<\/span>\u00a0[\u2026]<\/span>\u00a0which<\/span>\u00a0allows conclusions to be drawn about their age, origin and the hydrological processes involved. The result is a unique<\/span>\u00a0\u2018fingerprint\u2019 of<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>the water. The data confirm what is known amongst hydrologists as the \u2018old water paradox\u2019: The soil samples\u00a0<\/span>contain<\/span>\u00a0mainly \u2018old water\u2019 that has been stored in the soil for months or years, and\u00a0<\/span>very little<\/span>\u00a0new water from recent rainfall. A series of measurements taken between April 2020 and April 2023 shows\u00a0<\/span>that even\u00a0<\/span>at a depth of ten centimetres, only a third of the stored water is less than three weeks old.“<\/span>1<\/sup><\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\n

Here, water effectively becomes an actor that creates worlds according to their own unique timeline, determining the order in which it appears, where, and how.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Andrea\u00a0Ballestero\u00a0has developed\u00a0a very different\u00a0temporal horizon through her research in Costa Rica and Brazil. Using the example of the struggles against the commodification of water, she analysed\u00a0worlding as a\u00a0structure of successive bifurcations. By bifurcations, she means\u00a0those\u00a0moments and practices\u00a0that shape\u00a0the future, whereby people, things and ideas are categorically separated from one another and then kept at a distance. In her case, this involves an ethical separation between what is commodified and what is, and should remain, common good. Furthermore, as is\u00a0evident\u00a0from the book\u2019s title \u201cA\u00a0Future History of Water\u201d,\u00a0this has given rise to interesting temporal arrangements of the past,\u00a0present\u00a0and future.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIn place of images of the future, my collaborators hope to create preconditions, forms of structuring future collective responsibility even if that responsibility cannot be\u00a0allocated\u00a0juridically,\u00a0that is, by\u00a0identifying\u00a0responsible bodies and\u00a0establishing\u00a0causal connections.\u00a0[\u2026]\u00a0That does not mean, however, that the conditions my informants and their devices help set in place will remain meaningless for a future that has not yet arrived. At that moment, it might turn out that their actions were powerful precursors, activated as new and significant elements of that present. Just as, for example, the statistician that produced the first consumer price index in the nineteenth century did not foresee how inflation would help determine what is a humanitarian price for water, my interlocutors do not claim to secure the consequences of their actions in the future. In this\u00a0particular philosophy\u00a0of history, people know that their efforts can be flawed or never fully\u00a0effective, and\u00a0yet are necessary. They also know that in the future, the significance of their acts will be recognized differently, not as an instantiation of an image but as one of the preconditions for an unseen one.\u201d\u00a0(ibid,\u00a0190)<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And finally, worlding also means\u00a0<\/span>scaling<\/span><\/i>. At present, there is constant talk of too much and too little water. But what is the right amount for whom, and at what point in time? What characterises water-rich and water-poor regions when we link this\u00a0distinction\u00a0to the concept of relative poverty, which has already been developed in other contexts? In Wang\u2019s work, we find a reference to\u00a0environmental historian Donald\u00a0Worster\u00a0who argues that\u00a0\u201cthe experience of scarcity\u201d is \u201cstrongly culturally mediated, if not in fact culturally produced\u201d and in turn \u201cdrives the quest to achieve a greater mastery over the natural world\u201d\u00a0(Wang 2024,\u00a0122).\u00a0When we reflect on scaling in the context of\u00a0waterworlding, the question also arises as to whether knowledge of water at different scales is even comparable. I am thinking here, for example, of a common situation\u00a0where the weather app predicts\u00a0rain\u00a0but it is not actually raining at that point because the information is calculated rather than measured or experienced.\u00a0If knowledge on such different scales can nevertheless be meaningfully linked, how are bridges or workarounds built to achieve this, and how are the resulting discontinuities or ontological gaps addressed? Where does hegemonic worlding (for example, with the aid of \u201cbig data\u201d)\u00a0render\u00a0other forms of worlding (based on embodied everyday practices or indigenous knowledge) invisible or exclude them from\u00a0perception? This, in turn, leads us to the even more general question of how scales become relevant to\u00a0waterworlding\u00a0in the first place, and what meaningful reference point exists for this.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In their introduction to \u201cWater, Scales and Materiality: Anthropological Perspectives on Hydrosocial Relations\u201d (2026), Veronica Strang and Franz Krause suggest that scale should not be fixed as an analytical category but rather be understood as \u201cmodes of studying and doing\u201d, \u201cwith different conceptual and material scales flowing into each other, and people applying particular (and sometimes multiple) visions of scale according to the context in which they are acting\u201d. This dimension offers yet another connection to Tsing\u2019s understanding of worlding, which I would like to highlight here in conclusion: Her worlding exercises strongly encourage us to reflect on the kind of worlding we ourselves engage in through ethnographic, cultural studies and anthropological knowledge. We are thus explicitly called upon to understand worlding not only as \u201cmodes of doing\u201d, but also as \u201cmodes of studying\u201d. Therefore, I conclude this introductory post by inviting contributions that consciously heed this call, particularly in our times of crises and transition. This blog sets out to explore waterworlding, as Tsing has put it, as an emergent, non-centralized, cooperative practice and, in the sense of Strang and Krause, as a \u201cmode of studying and doing\u201d, by making experiences, insights, questions and debates available to others by sharing them. <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Acknowledgements<\/strong><\/p>\n

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Sabine\u00a0Eggmann\u00a0for our many years of in-depth discussion on this subject, for her constant challenges, her inspiring\u00a0comments\u00a0and her tireless\u00a0forward thinking, without which neither this text nor this blog would have been possible.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n

Ballestero, Andrea. 2019.\u202f<\/span>A Future History of Water<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0Durham, NC:\u00a0Duke University Press.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Bauman, Zygmunt. 2000.\u202f<\/span>Liquid Modernity<\/span><\/i>. Polity Press.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Cunha,\u00a0Dilip\u00a0da. 2018.\u202f<\/span>The Invention of Rivers: Alexander’s Eye and Ganga’s Descent<\/span><\/i>. 1st ed. Penn Studies in Landscape Architecture. University of Pennsylvania Press.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Dietzsch, Ina. 2020. „ANT.“ In\u202f<\/span>Kulturanthropologisch\u00a0argumentieren<\/span><\/i>, edited by Markus\u00a0Tauschek\u00a0and Timo\u00a0Heimerdinger, 76-98. UTB.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Hastrup, Kirsten, and Frida\u00a0Hastrup. 2015. „Waterworlds\u00a0at Large: Introduction.“\u00a0In\u202f<\/span>Waterworlds: Anthropology in Fluid Environments<\/span><\/i>, edited by Kirsten\u00a0Hastrup\u00a0and Frida\u00a0Hastrup,\u00a01-21.\u00a0<\/span>Berghahn\u00a0Books.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Latour, Bruno. 2009. „Die Logistik der\u00a0<\/span>Immutable\u00a0Mobiles<\/span><\/i>.“\u00a0In\u202f<\/span>Mediengeographie: Theorie \u2013 Analyse \u2013 Diskussion<\/span><\/i>,\u00a0edited\u00a0by\u00a0J\u00f6rg D\u00f6ring and Tristan Thielmann, 111-144.\u00a0<\/span>Transcript.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Marcus, George E. 1995. „Ethnography in\/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography.“\u202f<\/span>Annual Review of Anthropology<\/span><\/i>\u202f24: 95-117.\u202f<\/span>https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1146\/annurev.an.24.100195.000523<\/span><\/a>.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Menon,\u00a0Dilip\u00a0M., Nishat Zaidi, Simi Malhotra, and\u00a0Saarah\u00a0Jappie. 2022.\u202f<\/span>Ocean as Method: Thinking with the Maritime<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0London:\u00a0Routledge.\u202f<\/span>https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4324\/9781003279754<\/span><\/a>.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Neimanis<\/span>,\u00a0<\/span>Astrida.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/i>2017.\u00a0<\/span>Bodies of Water: Posthuman Feminist Phenomenology.\u00a0<\/span><\/i>Bloomsbury.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Strang, Veronica, and Franz Krause, eds. 2026.\u00a0<\/span>Water, Scale and Materiality: Anthropological Perspectives on\u00a0Hydrosocial\u00a0Relations<\/span><\/i>. 1st ed.,\u00a0vol. 36.\u00a0Berghahn\u00a0Books.\u202f<\/span>http:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/jj.35079611<\/span><\/a>.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Tsing, Anna. 2010. „Worlding the Matsutake Diaspora:\u00a0Or,\u00a0Can Actor-Network Theory Experiment with Holism?“ In\u202f<\/span>Experiments in Holism: Theory and Practice in Contemporary Anthropology<\/span><\/i>, edited by Ton Otto and Nils\u00a0Bubandt,\u00a047-66. Wiley-Blackwell.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Wang, Jamie. 2024.\u202f<\/span>Reimagining the More-than-Human City: Stories from Singapore<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0<\/span>MIT Press.\u202f<\/span>https:\/\/doi.org\/10.7551\/mitpress\/15189.001.0001<\/span><\/a>.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Welz, Gisela. 1998. „Moving Targets: Feldforschung unter Mobilit\u00e4tsdruck.“\u202f<\/span>Zeitschrift\u00a0f\u00fcr\u00a0Volkskunde<\/span><\/i>\u202f94: 177-194.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Footnotes<\/strong><\/p>\n

1<\/a> https:\/\/ethz.ch\/de\/news-und-veranstaltungen\/eth-news\/news\/2025\/05\/altes-wasser-neue-erkenntnisse.html<\/a><\/u><\/span>. In the interest of readability, the quote has been translated from German. Accessed July 15, 2026<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

Ina\u00a0<\/span>Dietzsch<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0is a cultural anthropologist and full professor\u00a0<\/span>at\u00a0<\/span>the Institute for Critical Studies in Culture and History (EKW) at Marburg University (<\/span><\/span>https:\/\/www.uni-marburg.de\/en\/fb03\/eech\/research\/marburg-water-lab<\/span><\/span><\/a>) with research interest<\/span>s<\/span>\u00a0in the field<\/span>s<\/span>\u00a0of\u00a0<\/span>the\u00a0<\/span>anthropology of knowledge,\u00a0<\/span>digitisation<\/span>\u00a0in everyday life and culture-nature-technology-relations.\u00a0<\/span>She holds\u00a0<\/span>a PhD from HU Berlin and\u00a0<\/span>completed<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>her\u00a0<\/span>habilitation at\u00a0<\/span>the\u00a0<\/span>University of Basel. She\u00a0<\/span>has\u00a0<\/span>taught at German and Swiss universities and worked in various research projects funded by the German BMBF and DFG, the ESRC and the Swiss National Research Council. She is also a board member of the Marburg Center of Digital Culture and Infrastructure (<\/span><\/span>https:\/\/www.uni-marburg.de\/en\/mcdci<\/span><\/span><\/a>)<\/span>\u00a0and currently a Fellow at the Stellenbosch Institute of Advanced Studies in South Africa.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

  Worlding makes the story possible, but from the margins. (Tsing 2010, 57)\u00a0\u00a0 In 2010,\u00a0Anna\u00a0Lowenhaupt\u00a0Tsing wrote\u00a0a seminal piece entitled\u00a0\u201cWorlding the Matsutake Diaspora or, can Actor-Network Theory experiment with holism\u201d\u00a0(Tsing 2010)\u00a0in which she operationalized the multifaceted theoretical concept of worlding\u00a0from a methodological perspective.\u00a0 Taking worlding as a set of connected relations in perpetual motion and transformation,\u00a0she […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":28,"featured_media":0,"menu_order":0,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"autor":[820],"class_list":["post-13543","waterworlding","type-waterworlding","status-publish","hentry","autor-ina-dietzsch"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/waterworlding\/13543","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/waterworlding"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/waterworlding"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/28"}],"version-history":[{"count":14,"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/waterworlding\/13543\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13588,"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/waterworlding\/13543\/revisions\/13588"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13543"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"autor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/boasblogs.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/autor?post=13543"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}