My participation in the Work Conference 2023 in August, organised by the University of Turku, got me to think about the pace of research. I presented our work done in Post-fossil working life project, funded by the Finnish Work Environment Fund, in a session devoted to sustainability issues in working life, Climate change and work. The room was packed with people and latecomers had no seats. Compared to 10 years ago the situation could have not been more different.
In 2013 we presented a paper “Political tensions in contemporary responsible work” with my colleague and co-author Tiina Taipale. We argued that there are people, such as the participants of our research, who increasingly consider the societal and ecological impacts of their work and leading their professional lives accordingly. After the presentation, an open stream, the audience were puzzled: So what are you saying? We left the conference feeling as puzzled. How is it possible that societal and ecological issues are not a recognised theme in working life studies?
Fest-forward a decade and there were not one but two sessions on work and societal and ecological issues in the same conference. What happened? What does it mean?
Global warming has become an issue that is covered in major news. Scientists and citizen movements urge politicians to emit less. The 6th mass extinction is discussed increasingly, also in conjuncure with carbon emissions. Unjust income inequality is being highlighted more and more by international organisations. Pandemics, famines, resource wars and other ecology related conflicts get talked about. In absolute terms, socio-ecological crisis and sustainability are more present as a discourse, including the material aspects of such talk.
I’m an advocate of slow science, when it comes to granting space and time to think and conduct research. Slow science means thinking over one’s position as a scholar and what does one’s research do in the world, among other themes that may have paradigmatic impacts. For instance, in Degrowth journal we are committed to slow science.
Yet, there is considerable slowness in turning to sustainability issues in working life studies. The theme of Work conference in 2023 is “Digital Capitalism: Peril and Possibilities”, a very timely and important topic given the quick rise platform of economies. Yet, the word “platform” is mentioned only once in the abstract book for Work conference 2013, while 258 times in 2023. Thus, it seems there is an ability to take on new topics quickly and give enough space for them.
My experience is that the field of working life studies is nowadays more familiar with and welcoming to talking about socio-ecological crisis and sustainability issues. I have enjoyed this year’s Work Conference and meeting with smart colleagues. Despite these pleasant encounters, there is friction in embracing the topics related to socio-ecological crisis, the environment, and sustainability. The process has been slow compared to the urgency of these issues.
I argue that the slowness stems from the practice of fast science (as explained by Isabelle Stengers). The slowness in adopting the themes is not due to people taking (working) time to ponder what socio-ecological crisis, the environment, and sustainability mean for working life studies. Rather, slowness is due to the fact that there’s little or no room for scholars to consider what these themes mean for working life. Especially when the discussion moves toward strong sustainability, political economy, and current economic growth oriented policies. Scholars are too busy hustling the academic system, such like platform gig workers (the description of hustle culture and gig economy is from Jasmine Hill’s inspiring digital ethnography).
During the next three years, when I have have a (somewhat) secured position in the academia, my job is to advance research in the intersection of socio-ecological crisis (or sustainability) and working life. If you are on-board, please get in touch.
Eeva Houtbeckers 
Leave a comment