How does data "fix futures" in your project?
Data plays an important role in constituting knowledge around PFAS as is intangible and invisible, hence can only be observed when looking for it. This means that data and measurements of pollution/contamination are important sources for understanding and constructing the materiality of PFAS/making it comprehensible and therefore actionable. This means that data can have a disruptive character as seen on Fanoe, but also stabilizing if it meets certain criteria that no action is needed (legally).
In this sense, data as measurements crucially forms knowledge regimes around PFAS that again inform action and futurity of PFAS in different media. So, the ban of the whole group of PFAS based on different data sets shapes the existence of PFAS as material molecules within different environments. The knowledge of how PFAS travels and how contamination foregoes is crucially based on different measurements and modes of trackung. This knowledge again informs practices surrounding different infrastructures and technologies of how certain elements are handled, for example if recycling protocolls are adapted to the material properties of PFAS through these data insights.
Furthermore, this includes that assumptions and "ideologies" surrounding PFAS are changing in accordance with data sets, e.g. the dynamic between seafoam and seawater that challenges the assumption of oceans as a sink for PFAS pollution.
Where is data missing?
As PFAS has not been on the "map" of different actors, there is no comprehensive overview over data pollutions. Furthermore, the measurements oftentimes only include certain types of PFAS, leaving out a majority of bonds. This also due to a lack of data on who uses which chemicals whatfor and in which quantities, meaning that there is no way of knowing the amounts of PFAS in different networks.
These are the very obvious "missing" data points, what other data is missing that includes a more critical perspective on data and data sets? How to overcome this essentialistic perspective on data in this very case?
How to incorporate "geographies of ignorance"?
How does the dataset of the Forever Pollution Project interact with different scales?
Data - Meso (Organizations/Networks) | The publication of the comprehensive dataset and especially its visualizations put the topic of PFAS in public light and as a more prominent aspect of media coverage. This means, that the data interacted with/influenced the organizations and networks of public attention | furthermore, it might have led to more extensive monitoring of PFAS concentrations in different media, although this connection is rather speculative at this point
Data - Technologies | This is exactly the scale I want to look at in my project. Especially the interaction between Pfas (or the knowledge of PFAS through datapoints) and different infrastructures is in the center of my research to investigate how PFAS travel between different sites through/with critical infrastructures. This is then not specifically about the interaction between the dataset and technologies but rather about the interaction between PFAS itself as a material and the regarded infrastructures.
Data - Eco (Environment/Climate) | at this point, it is rather unclear if and how the presented data might influence the scale of the environment. Assuming that the publication of the data led to more thorough investigations of PFAS pollution and the attempt to ban PFAS on an EU-Level, this might impact environmental pollution and contamination. This means, that is rather an indirect effect/relation. It nevertheless illustrates the underlying materiality of PFAS and they ways of knowing it. It furthermore is closely linked to the scale of technologies/infrastructures as these highly impact how/if PFAS are polluting and contaminating through (allowed/inadvertently) releases. It is then also connected to the legal scale that shapes the legislatory framework around release, contamination and pollution.
Data - Macro (Law/Policy/Economics) | As implied in the formulation of the other scales, the publication of the data might have been highly influential in the initiation of proposing a ban of PFAS altogether within the EU, although this is hard to tell at this moment.
Defintions | What is PFAS? | differently defined by municipalities, environmental institutions, water monitoring systems, law making (e.g. EU ban on PFAS: What should be included within this group of chemicals and why?) | to make PFAS tangible and measurable, e.g. to define which PFAS have to be measured and accounted for | high influence on what is being measured and monitored: building the foundation of other data sets in regard to what is being taken as a serious contaminant, what is left out and which blind spots are created through this definition?
Datasets + Maps | Forver Pollution Project Dataset | joint set of collected data by different journalist and media institutions all over Europe | might be mobilized by legislation and lawmaking, but also lobbying groups | visualization and collection of a comprehensive overview over suspected and measured pollution, put PFAS "on the map" of public concern through extensive media coverage
Indexes | What is a threshold/definition of thresholds for PFAS in drinking water | mobilized by municipalities and water distributors | to monitor levels of PFAS in drinking water, making sure to provide "safe" drinking water | if thresholds are exceeded, measures to reduce the amount have to be initiated (depending on the national law/governance)