Mobile phones, batteries and power consumption: An analysis of social practices in Portugal

(1)

Contents lists available atScienceDirect

Energy

Research

&

Social

Science

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e :w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / e r s s

Original

research

article

Mobile

phones,

batteries

and

power

consumption:

An

analysis

of

social

practices

in

Portugal

Ana

Horta

∗

,

Susana

Fonseca,

Mónica

Truninger,

Nélia

Nobre,

Augusta

Correia

UniversityofLisbon,InstituteofSocialSciences,Portugal,RuaProf.AníbaldeBettencourt,9,1600-189LisbonPortugal

a

r

t

i

c

l

e

i

n

f

o

Articlehistory: Received2April2015 Receivedinrevisedform 27November2015 Accepted30November2015 Availableonlinexxx Keywords: Energysociology Theoriesofpractice Distributedagency

Informationandcommunication technologies

Youth Everydaylife

a

b

s

t

r

a

c

t

Thearticleexamineshowsocialpracticesofchargingandmanagingthepowerofmobilephonesare formed.Theusefulnessoftheconceptofdistributedagencyasatoolfortheunderstandingofthe dimen-sionsthatconstitutesocialpracticesrelatedtoenergyconsumptionisexplored.Basedonﬁndingsfrom interviewsandasurveyconductedwithadolescents,threemomentsintheformationofthesepractices areidentiﬁed:emergenceofelementarybatteryuse,accelerationofrhythmandestablishmentoflinks, andnormalization.Thearticleprovidesempiricalevidenceofthedistributedagencyofbodies,objects, andsocio-culturalcontextsinthedevelopmentofthesepractices.

1. Introduction

Mobile communication devices have spread rapidly and are becomingubiquitousineverydaylife.Despiteuneven dissemina-tionacrosstheworld,mobiletelephonesubscriptionshavenearly reachedthenumberofpeopleonEarth[30].Concomitantly,the overallenergy consumption relatedto mobilephoneshasbeen growing[68].ItisestimatedthattheglobalCO2emissionsofmobile

communicationsmayalmosttriplebetween2007and2020[16]. Agrowingbodyofliteraturepointsoutseveralfactorsas contrib-utorstotheriseofenergyconsumptionrelatedtomobilephones: increasingownershipandrapidreplacementofolderdevices (stim-ulatedbymarketingstrategiesandproductdesign);growingdata trafﬁcduetothecommonuseofapplicationsrelyingontheinternet (webbrowsing,gaming,andespeciallyvideostreaming,requiring powerfulserversanddatacenterswhichneedcooling);an increas-ingnumberofsitesofmobilenetworkinfrastructure;wideand brightscreens;inefﬁciencyduringthechargingprocess;standby consumptionofbatterychargers;amongothers[8,68,25,41,59].

∗ Correspondingauthor.

E-mailaddresses:ana.horta@ics.ulisboa.pt

(A.Horta),susana.fonseca@ics.ulisboa.pt(S.Fonseca),

monica.truninger@ics.ulisboa.pt(M.Truninger),nobrenelia@gmail.com(N.Nobre),

augusta.correia@ics.ulisboa.pt(A.Correia).

Notwithstandingrecentefﬁciencyimprovementstothebattery chargersofmobilephones,thesestillhaveenergylosses,whichare increasedbythefactthatchargersstillconsumeenergywhenthey areleftpluggedintothegrid[28,25].

Fewstudiesfocusonhuman–batteryinteraction,andthese indi-catethatthewayusersrelatetomobilephonesmayincreasethe energyconsumptionassociatedwiththesedevices[3,26]. More-over,RahmatiandZhong[45]observedthatpower-savingsettings ofmobilephonesaredesignedinwaysthatarehardforusersto employthem.Thesestudieshavebeenconductedmostlyinthe ﬁeld of computerengineering, oftentryingtoassess modelsof increasingenergyefﬁciency(mainlybyprovidingmore informa-tiontousers).Thus,theydonotofferanalysisofhowthepower requirementofmobilephonebatteriesisentangledineveryday lifepractices.

Some studies have analyzed sociological aspects of energy consumptionrelatedtotheuseofinformationand communica-tiontechnologies[20,21,15,31,48,47,13,49,50,44,11].Thesestudies provide insightfuland valuable contributionsto theanalysisof energyconsumptionrelatedtothesetechnologies.However,none ofthesestudiesfocusesexclusivelyonmobilephones.

The energy consumption involved in charging the batteries ofmobilephonesisasmallcontributortotheglobalchallenges relatedtothecurrentenergytransition.However,analysisofthe socialpracticesofchargingandmanagingthebatteriesofmobile

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.11.010

(2)

phonesshedslightonhowtheseenergy-usingtechnologiesare embeddedinsociety.Thisanalysismaythereforecontributetothe understandingof energyasan “ingredient”oftheeveryday life practicesofwhichsocietiesarecomposed[57].

Fromthisperspective,thisarticleseekstoanalyzetheenergy consumption related to mobile phone use by focusing on the practicesofchargingandmanagingthepowerofmobilephones. With this purpose in mind we draw on theories of practice [46,63,64,56,57]and explore theconcept of distributed agency [65,66,51]asausefultoolfortheunderstandingofthedimensions thatconstitutethesesocialpractices.

The pervasiveness and embeddedness of mobile phones in youngpeople’sdailylivesmakeadolescentsapreferentialgroupof practitionersforanalysisofthepracticesofchargingand manag-ingmobilephonebatteries.Indeed,theadoptionanduseofmobile phonesarehigher amongyoungpeople[38,39].Inrecent years socialsciencehasproducedknowledgeofseveralaspectsofthe dif-fusionandappropriationofmobilephonesbyyoungpeople(e.g., [35,60,14,18]).However,thetopicofmobilephones’energy con-sumptionhasgenerally beenoverlooked. In a recent review of researchonyoungpeople’s useofmobilephones,Haddon [24] observedthatmoststudieshavefocusedontheirrelationswith parentsandpeers.Regardingtherelationshipsbetweenparents andtheirchildren,researchhasshownthattheformerusually pro-videmobilephonestothelatterandsubsequentlyﬁnancetheiruse. Althoughthisissometimesawayforparentstomonitorchildren, themobilephonemayalsobeameanswherebychildrenachieve someprivacyandautonomy[24].Onthesubjectoftherelations betweenpeers,researchhashighlightedthesymbolicdimension ofmobilephonesinyoungpeople’spresentationofself,asthese devicesare oftenused asindicatorsof trendinessand popular-ity[24].Research hasalsopointedto youth’sopennesstonew technologies, pioneeringuses andability toappropriate mobile phonesfortheirownpurposes[9].Ourstudyaddstothis litera-turebyexplaininghowadolescentsarerecruitedtothepractices ofchargingandmanagingthepowerofmobilephones.Indoingso, wecontributetotheunderstandingofenergyconsumptioninthe everydaylifeofadolescents.

Inthefollowingwepresent abriefintroductiontothe theo-riesofpractice,payingmore attentiontothethree dimensions highlightedbytheconceptofdistributedagency(bodies,objects andsocio-culturalcontexts)andhowtheyconstitutesocial prac-tices. After presenting the materials and methods used in our study,weanalyzetheemergenceandnormalizationofthe prac-tices of chargingand managingmobile phonebatteries among adolescents.

2. Understandingpracticesrelatedtoenergyconsumption Akey ideainthedevelopmentof thesociologyofenergy is theacknowledgementoftherelevanceofunderstandingmundane consumption.Unlikeotherthingsthatareconsumedinaclearly visibleway,energyuseismostlyinvisible,andderivesfrom ser-vices,suchasheating, lighting,cleaning [67,54]orconnectivity withothers. Indeed, electricity and otherforms of energy “are essentialbut,ifbroughttomindatall,tendtobeconsidered subor-dinate,instrumentaltoamoremeaningfulactivity”[23,pp.4–5].In the“mobilenetworksociety”[9],moreandmoreobjectsof every-daylifeconsumeenergy.Thisconsumptionisoftensurreptitious andimperceptible.In ordertounderstandenergy consumption, attentionshouldthereforebegiventoembodiedhabits,routines, andmodesofuseofenergyservices.Howtheseservicesbecome conﬁguredandappropriatedatasocietallevelasnormalpractice shouldthusbeanalyzed[54]. Inthis thread,social conventions haveastronginﬂuenceonthedemandforenergyservices,butas

theseservicesareprovidedbytechnologies,attentionshouldalso begiventomaterialcontextsandconditionsofuse,suchasusers’ competences[27].

Inthisperspective,theoriesofpracticeprovideavaluable back-groundfortheanalysisofenergyconsumption.Inspiteofbeing ratherheterogeneousandwithmultipleversions,itcanbesaid thatpracticetheory(shorthandfortheoriesofpracticehenceforth) isbasedontheworkofGiddens[19]andBourdieu[5],asrecently revivedwiththecontributionsofSchatzkiandReckwitz[52],[46] and,inparticularwithinconsumptionstudies,ofWarde[63],and Shoveetal.[56],amongothers.Inouraccountwearealsoespecially drawingonWilhite[66].

Practice theory enablesus tounderstand the complexity of inconspicuousroutinesbyexamininghow combinationsof ele-mentssuchasmaterials(things,technologies),competences(skills, know-how) and meanings(conventions, ideas, aspirations), co-evolve, and how these are enacted in theform of patterns of practices,which are carriedout byindividuals in thecourseof theirnormaleverydaylifeandembeddedinsocialdynamicsand historicalandmaterialcontexts[56].AccordingtoReckwitz[46,p. 249],apractice“isaroutinizedtypeofbehaviorwhich consists ofseveralelements,interconnectedtooneanother:formsof bod-ilyactivities,formsofmentalactivities,‘things’andtheiruse, a backgroundknowledgeintheformofunderstanding,know-how, statesofemotionandmotivationalknowledge.”Itseems worth-whiletohighlightsomeoftheseelements,namelybyreferringto thefactthatpracticesarethusseenasskillfulmovementsof bod-ies,or“routinizedbodilyperformances”,asinthecaseofwalking a dog, cooking or talking onthe phone; moreover, these per-formancesrequire“certainroutinizedwaysofunderstandingthe world,ofdesiringsomething,ofknowinghowtodosomething”, and areenabled orlimited by things[46,pp.251–252].Despite theacknowledgementoftherelevanceoftheseelements,theroles playedbybodiesandthingsinhabitsandroutinesstillneed clari-ﬁcation[64].

Inlinewiththis theoreticalframework,energy consumption shouldnotbeconsideredas“somethingperformedbyindividuals” buta“resultoftheinteractionbetweenthings,people,knowledge, andsocialcontexts”[66,p.67].Thisstandpointcanbeexpanded fur-therthroughtheconceptofdistributedagency[66],whichseems tocondensesomeofthemajorthreadsofpracticetheory. Under-standingagencyas capacitytoinﬂuence acts([40] cit. in[66]), distributedagencymeansthatthecapacityofforminga particu-larpracticeissharedbyagentiveaspectsacrossthreedimensions ofpractices:bodies,objectsandsocialcontexts[66,51].Byputting forwardagency–andnotagents–atthecenterofanalysis,rational choiceandindividualattitudesareminimized.Inasmuchasrational choicetheorieshave conquereda strongholdin thewider con-sumptionstudiesﬁeld,theyhavefailedtotakeproperaccountof socialandmaterialcontexts.Indeed,inthe“praxeologicalfamilyof theories”[46]wherewecanincludepracticetheory,actionshould beconsidereda“conglomerateofmanysurprisingsetsofagencies” ratherthanbeingfullycontrolledbyconsciousness[32,p.44].

2.1. Bodiesandembodiedskills

Asmentionedabove,thebodyisoneofthesesetsofagencies. Inthisperspective,thetraditionalCartesiandistinctionbetween mind and body is supplanted by a conception of an indissolu-blemind-bodythatisimmersedinparticularsocialandmaterial environments. Accordingto theanthropologist Ingold [29],the relationshipsexperiencedby agents withintheseenvironments become embodied as capacities of awareness and response, or skills.Thefactthattheseskillscanbeconsideredembodied dis-positions for action hassimilarities with Bourdieu’sconcept of habitus.AsBourdieu[6,7]states,livedexperiencesinscribehabitus

(3)

intobodies,andthesehabitusconstituteschemesofperception, thoughtandaction,whichorientatepractices.It isimportantto notethathabitusguaranteestheconformityofpracticesperformed byindividualswithcollectiveprocesses.However,atthesametime, theseperformancesarenotjustmereimplementationsofsocial modelsandnorms,sinceparticularlifeexperiencesanddifferent situationsallowforadaptationandindividualcreativity.Habitus canthusbeunderstoodasa“socializedbiologicalbody”[7].That is,a “kindofpractical mastery”acquiredby“routinelycarrying outspeciﬁctasksinvolvingcharacteristicposturesandgestures”, whichiswhatIngold[29,p.162]associateswithskill.Thus,through experienceandtraining intheperformanceof particular activi-ties,skillsareincorporatedintohumanbodies[29].Bodiesbecome “repositoriesofexperiences”,uniqueformsofknowledgewhich affecttheways peopleadapt tonewexperiences and consume [61].Insum,inthisview,lifeexperiencesandroutinesareways ofacquiringcompetences,understandingsanddispositionswhich areembeddedbothinbodyandmindandinﬂuenceindividuals’ capacitytoact.

Literature on the use of information and communication technologies hasprovided a good empirical illustration of this perspective. As pointed out by Christensen and Ropke [12,p. 241],computeruseisa“mental-bodilyroutinizedpractice”that, once learned through training, allows the user to apply the samecompetencesandunderstandingsinothersituations,such as using mobile phones, DVD players, or withdrawing money fromcashdispensers.Thus,wecansaythatthroughexperience and habitmostpeoplehave incorporatedskillsthat are shared withotherpracticesrequiringsimilarmental-bodilygesturesand logics(waysofdoingandthinking).Thesedispositionscan facil-itate (or not)adaptation to new technologies, as when people who have learned to master the computer mouse and physi-calkeyboardsstartusingtouchscreens insmartphonesorother devices.

2.2. Objectsandmaterialcontexts

Besidesillustratingtherelevanceofembodiedskills,the exam-plesabovealsoshowhowobjectsarecloselyrelatedto(oreven integratedin)bodily-mentalroutines.Indeed,aspreviously men-tioned, technologies and material contexts are another set of agenciesformingpractices.Or,asputbyShoveetal.[56],things andmaterialshaveaconstitutiveroleineverydaylife.This con-ceptionsharesinsightswithscienceandtechnologystudies,within whichliteratureontheagencyofnon-humanshasbeenfurther developed. Farfrom adopting a deterministicpoint of view on theinfluenceoftechnologyoversociety,practicetheoryfocuson howobjectsparticipateinthecontinualconfigurationofpractices. AsillustratedbyLatour[32,p.77],thepracticeofbeinga“couch potato”infrontofatelevisionsethasbeen“permittedbytheTV command”whichallowstheviewertosurffromchanneltochannel despitehisimmobility.Objectsarethus“bearersofpredispositions forconsumption”[66,p.66].Thisperspectivehasbenefitedfrom Akrich’s[2]conceptofscript.Assheargues,technologiescan pre-scribeorpermitcertainrelationshipsbetweenusersandobjects throughaprocessof“inscribing”programsofactionintheobject. Inthisprocess,designerstrytoembedintheobjecttheirvisions offutureusers’skills,purposesandunderstandings.However,as observedbyAkrich,processesof“description”alsooccur, inthe sensethatrealusersareactiveagentsinshapingtheirrelationships withobjects.Intunewiththedevelopmentoftechnologystudies, whichunderlineusers’activeappropriationoftechnologies,itcan besaidthat,bybringingtheirembodiedhabitsandexperiencesto howtheyusetechnologies,individualscanrejectthosescriptsand useobjectsinunexpectedwayswhichdifferfromtheonesintended bydesigners.

Objects are not isolated from material contexts. The devel-opment of domestication theory has shown the complexity of relationshipswiththeobjectswithinthesocio-technicalcontexts ofhouseholdsineverydaylife.Fromthispointofview,new tech-nologiesarelikewildanimalsthathavetobe“housetrained”or, inotherwords,“integratedintothestructures,dailyroutinesand valuesofusersandtheirenvironments”inordertobecomepart ofthefamily [4,p.2].Thisperspective highlightstheprocessof integratingartifactsintosettingsandassociatingthemwith prac-tices,peopleandotherthings[58].Insum,bothobjectsandthe socio-technicalcontextinwhichtheyareusedhavethecapacityto inﬂuencepractices.

Thereisevidenceofthisagencyintheliterature,forexample abouthowtheeconomiccontextcontributedtothe populariza-tionofthemobilephoneamongadolescents.AsobservedbyLing and Yttri[36],akey elementintheadoption ofmobilephones byteenagershasbeenthepre-paidcardsystem.Duetothehigh costofphonecalls,thepre-paidcardaffordedparentsthe possibil-ityofavoidinglargebills,sincethecallsarepaidforbeforehand and, afterthat amountis spent,thephoneonly allowscalls or messagestobereceived.Furthermore,asSMStextmessagesare usuallycheaperthanphonecalls,teenagershavebeeninducedto usethemmore—andhavebecomeuserstoanextentthathadnot beenforeseenbydesigners[9].

Moreover,theagencyofmaterialcontextsismanifestifwe con-siderthatmobilephonesaredependentonwirelessnetworks,as wellasinterdependentwithothermobilephones,tosuchahigh degreethattheseinteractionsstronglyinﬂuencetheexperience ofusersandeventuallypractices:forexampleareliableandhigh qualitysignaltransmissioncanprovideasatisfyingfeelingandthus supportthehabitoflongphonecallsor,intheoppositesituation, inducetheuseofothermeansofcommunication.Theexpansionof theWi-Fiinfrastructurealsoencouragestheuseofwebbrowsing andsocialnetworkingthroughmobilephones.

2.3. Socio-culturalcontexts

Thethirddimensionofdistributedagencyweaddressconcerns socio-culturalcontexts.AccordingtoSahakianandWilhite[51], thisdimensionincludessettings,norms,values andinstitutions. Changesintheseelementsmayalsoinﬂuenceshiftsinpractices. Indeed, asshown byShove and Pantzar[55] thehistory of the practiceof(recreational)walkingisstronglyconnectedtothe insti-tutionalizationofleisure,toconventionsandideologiesrelatedto nature,freedom,wellbeing andhealth, aswellas tomarketing. Furthermore,theseconditionsvarybetweendifferentculturaland socialsettings.Thus,attentionneedstobepaidtothe“creation ofnorms,standardsandinstitutionswhichproduceshared under-standingsandcommonprocedures”[64,p.295].Fromourpointof view,thisdimensionreferstothesharedlayerofknowledge(or cognitive-symbolicstructures)which,accordingtoReckwitz[46,p. 246],enablesasymbolicorganization ofrealitybylayingdown “whichdesiresareregardedasdesirableandwhichnormsare con-sideredtobelegitimate”. Thesesharedstructuresofknowledge seemtoprovidetheframeworkforandformulatetheconventions and expectationsregarding what canbeconsidered a“normal” practice[54].

AgoodillustrationofthiswasprovidedbyPantzar[42]studyof thediffusionprocessofthemobilephoneinFinland.Inorderfor thistechnologytobeadoptedasanormalobjectineverydaylife, theuseofthemobilephonehadtobeembeddedwithinthevalues andnormsofthatspeciﬁcsocio-culturalcontext.Asitspread,and throughtheaccumulationofuserexperience,itcametobeseen asausefultool,notjustasatoyorafashionablegadget.Hence,as Pantzarobserved,theuseofthemobilephonebecameculturally stabilizedandasociallyacceptedneed.Norms,valuesandways

(4)

oforganizingeverydaylifesuchastheextensionofthepossibility ofmakingsocialcontact,expandingoccasionsforinteractionwith familyand friends,micro-coordinating interactions inreal time [36],reproducingfeelingsof“closeness”or“connectedpresence”in relationships[33,10],assertingautonomy[9],andevenproviding asenseofsecurity[34],seemtohavebeendecisiveinthe normal-izationofthemobilephoneuseineverydaylife.Asobservedby Sorensen[58],withthediffusionofthemobilephoneinNorway, accesstoitbecamepressing.Furthermore,thefeelingof belong-ingorbeingpartofagroupurgesusersalwaystocarrythemobile phonewiththemandtohaveitturnedon,andthus,“overtime, acollectivedomesticationproducesnewnormsandexpectations thatinﬂuencethewaytheartifactisused,themeaningitsigniﬁes, andthepossibilitiesoflearningnewwaysofdoingandthinking aboutit”[58,p.56].

2.4. Distributedagencyandchangeinpracticesdependenton energyconsumption

Theconceptofdistributedagencymayhelptounderstandhow practicesemerge,stabilize,changeandeventuallydisappear.As shownintheliteratureabovementioned,theagencyofthesethree dimensions contributes to the continual conﬁguration of prac-tices.Tobesure,fromthestandpointofpracticetheory,agency isnotunderstoodasresultingfromindividualrationalchoiceand interests,northeoutcomeofsocialstructures.Aspointedoutby Giddens,actionisbothshapedandenabledbysocialstructures,and thesedependontheirreproductionthroughhumanaction;hence, practicesdependonformsofpracticalknowledgeguidedby struc-turalfeatureslikerulesandresources([19];cit.in[56]).Inpractice theory,individuals(orpractitioners)arethereforeunderstoodas carriers ofpractices [46,56].Theanalysis ofthedynamic inter-connectionsbetweentheelementsthatintegratepracticesenables tounderstandhowthesechangei.e.,areformed,reproducedand dissolved[43].

From ourpoint of view,understanding how these different dimensionsformpracticescontributestoenvisaginghowenergy consumption is embedded in everyday life. However, energy consumption,ortheconsumptionofotherresources(e.g.,water orrawmaterials),canbeunderstoodasameansofaccomplishing certainpractices[63]or“anoutcome”ofperformingpractices[62], notasa practiceitself. Forexample,postingmessages tosocial mediaonamobilephoneimpliesconsumingbatterypower.While postingmessagesorvideosisanactivityrecognizableasapractice (accordingtoWarde’s[64]criteriaforidentifyingpractices),using theelectricityrequiredtoaccomplishthatpracticeisnot—despite practitioners’ need to ensure its availability. Thus, watching videosonthemobilephone,forinstance,impliestakingonother activities,suchassimplyplugginginthephonetoapowersupply, ormanagingthebattery’slifebyorchestratingcompetencessuch asturning offfeatures and other servicesthat drain itspower. Therefore, we analyze the practices of charging and managing thepowerofmobilephones(inextricablyinterwovenwithother co-dependent practices related to mobile phone use), and not simplyofconsumingenergythroughtheuseofmobilephones.

Asargued by Gram-Hanssen [22], if energy consumption is consideredpartofseveraldifferentpractices, weshould exam-inewhetherchanges in parallel practices affectother practices whichhavesimilarelements(technologies,know-howorother). Therefore,consideringthatthebodily-mentalactivitiesinvolvedin mobilephonebatterymanagementarearoutinizedpracticesimilar totheuseofdifferenttechnologieswhichrequirethesame com-petencesandunderstandings,analyzingtheroutines,competences andunderstandingsrelatedtomobilephonesbatterymanagement mayshed lightonavarietyof practicesthatinvolvetheuseof batteries.

3. Settinganempiricalstudyofchargingandmanaging mobilephonebatteries

Practicetheorieshavebeensubjecttocriticismforavarietyof reasons,akeyissuebeingthefactthatpractices(andnot individu-als)shouldbeconsideredtheunitofanalysis,whichinturnraises theproblemofdeﬁningtheboundariesofapractice[64].Onthe topicoftheanalysisofinformationandcommunication technolo-giesbasedonapracticetheoryapproach,ChristensenandRopke [12]notedtheambiguityinthedelimitationofdifferentpractices thatincludethesetechnologies.Forexample,themobilephonecan beusedinadiversityofpracticessuchasinteractingwithfriendsor playinggames.Inthisarticlewefocusparticularlyonbattery charg-ingandmanagement.Thus,weanalyzetheinterwovenactivities carriedoutinordertoguaranteemobilephones’power.

Resultspresentedinthisarticlearepartofaresearchproject on energy consumption related toteenagers’ use of electronic media.Our projectcombinesquantitativeand qualitative meth-ods,asthiskindofmixedmethodapproachprovidesinsightsfor understandingthediversity of theperformancesanalyzed both in extensiveand in intensiveforms. In linewiththis approach wecarriedoutasurveyandinterviewswithadolescentsenrolled in three schools in Lisbon, Portugal. In order to guarantee a diversiﬁedsample,eachschoolrepresentsdistinctsocio-economic backgrounds.Oneoftheschoolsisaregularsecondarystate-funded school(andthustheparentsoftheenrolledpupilshaveavariety ofsocio-economicstatuses);asecondstate-fundedschooloffers work-oriented/professionalcourses,withmoststudents coming fromlowerincomefamilies;thethird schoolisanelite private school,withmostpupilsbelongingtowell-offfamilies.

Throughthesurveywecollecteddataonthemessuchasthe electronicmediaowned,thefrequency, intensity,activitiesand placesof electronicmediause, and somedoingsrelated tothe energyconsumptionofthesedevices.Studentsrespondedtothis paper-and-pencil questionnaire during one class period, in the presence of one of the researchers. The survey wasconducted betweenNovember2014andJanuary2015.Thesampleincludes 748studentsenrolledintheninthtotwelfthgrade.Intotal54%of respondentsareboysand46%aregirls.Theaverageageis16.

Theintervieweeswererecruitedamongthesurveyrespondents. Ahighernumberofgirlswerewillingtoparticipateand, there-fore,only8outof22interviewswereconductedwithboys.Nine intervieweeswereenrolledattheregularschool,nineatthe pri-vateschool,andfourattheprofessionalschool.Themescovered includedtheirdailyroutinesofelectronicmediause,engagements with electronic media(meanings, attachment, peerand family pressures),competencesinelectronicmediaandenergy consump-tion(knowledge,skills),andmaterialenvironment(devicesowned, access to related services and infrastructures). On averagethe interviewslasted 104min.Theseinterviewstookplacebetween December2014andMarch2015.Afterbeingfullytranscribed,the interviewsweresubjecttoqualitativecontentanalysis.Theprocess ofcodingtheinterviewsevolvedfromaninitialsetofcategories correspondingtothethemesexplored,toasecondcodingaimed atidentifyingthecontentsrelatedtobodies,objects,and socio-culturalcontexts.Afterthatwere-analyzedtheinterviewslooking for practices related tocharging and managingmobile phones’ power(thirdcoding).Thefollowingcategorieswerethen identi-ﬁed:emergenceofelementarybatteryuse,accelerationofrhythm andestablishmentoflinks,andnormalization.Theﬁndings pre-sentedherearebasedontheintersectionsobservedbetweenthe secondandthirdcodingprocesses.

(5)

4. Practicesofchargingandmanagingthepowerofmobile phones

Inthefollowingweobservediverseconfigurationsinthe rela-tionshipsbetweenbodies,objectsandsocio-culturalcontexts.As the interconnections between these dimensions are redefined, practicesofchargingandmanagingthepowerofmobilephones emerge.Inordertoanalyzehowtheconfigurationsbetweenthese dimensionsco-evolve,welookatthechangeswhichhaveoccurred inthe(short)lifecourseofadolescents.

4.1. Emergenceofelementarybatteryuse

Somestudiesindicatethatparentstendtoencouragetheuse ofinformationandcommunicationtechnologiesbychildrenasa wayoffavoringtheiropportunitiesinlife[20,37,53].Moreover,the useofthemobilephoneinparticularhasbeenpointedouttobe promotedbyparentsasawayofprovidingcontrol[24],asenseof security[34],orcloseness[10]intheirrelationswiththeirchildren. Datafromourinterviewswithadolescentsshowthatinmany casestheirfirstmobile phonewasgiven tothemontheir par-ents’initiative,andnotduetoarequestoftheirown.Furthermore, datafromoursurveyshowthattheaverageageatwhichthefirst mobilephonewasobtainedwas10years(SD=2.08).Thisis pre-ciselywhenchildrenmovefromprimaryschoolstothenextlevel ofeducation,whichusuallyimpliesattendinglargerschoolswith lesssocialcontrol.Oftentherearealsochangesintheirorganization ofeverydaylife,duetodifferentschoolhoursandtheirenrollment inafter-schoolactivities.Thesechangessometimesmeanthat chil-drenstartcommutingbythemselves,orthattheystartneedingto calltheirrelativestopickthemupattheendofthedayortotake themtoafter-schoolactivities.Themobilephonethenbecomesa devicethatentersintochildren’severydaylifewithquitelimited functionality—itsuseismostlyrestrictedtocontactingchildren’s parents.AsVítor1 _told_us,_his_first_mobile_phone_was_just_meant

tolethisparentsknowwherehewas,andwhetheroneofthem wasalreadywaitingfortheotherwhenpickuparrangementswere made.

Insomecases,thesemobilephoneswerenotevenownedbythe children,butonlylenttothemforthetimetheywereatschool(so thattheycoulduseit“incaseofemergency”,asOlíviaexplainedto us).Inaddition,themaintenanceofthedevicewasnotexpectedto beensuredbythechild.Thuseventhoughthebatterywasalready presentasanobject,thechildwasnotrequiredtodevelopanyskill relatedtoit.

ThecaseofDanielaillustratesthisprocesswell.Herﬁrstmobile phonewasgiventoherbyhermotherwhenshewassevenyears old.Atthetimeshewasonlyabletouseittocallhermother—“I didn’tknowverywellhowtouseit”.Shewasnotfullyawareofthe requirementsoftheobject,asthemobilephonehadnotacquired muchmeaningforheryet,butsheremembershermother’sconcern aboutit:

“Mymotherusedtosay«Daniela,goandgetthechargerandplugit in.»BecauseIdidn’teventhinkaboutit.Itwasmoreimportantfor hersothatshecouldcommunicatewithme,thanforme.Ididn’t careaboutthat,butshewasalwayssaying‘gogetthecharger,you havetochargeyourmobilephonesothatIcancontactwithyou tomorrow.”(Daniela)

Thus,inthecaseofDaniela,shewasaskedtoembodytheaction ofchargingherphone,butshewasnotexpectedtomasterthat skillbyherself.Althoughcarryingoutthattaskgavehertraining,

1_The_names_of_the_interviewees_are_aliases.

shehadnotdevelopedyetafullconnection(i.e.,afullmental-body disposition)withtheobject,asthisconnectionwasinfactmediated byhermother.Indeed,therelevanceofusingthemobilephonewas stillverylimitedandcircumscribedtocontactinghermother,and thedevice’sneedforenergywasregulatedbyhermother.

In thecase of Eduardo,charginghisﬁrst mobilephone was straightforward.Althoughnobodyelsewasregulatinghismobile phone’s power usage, hisembodiment of the skillof charging thephonewaselementary,involvingonlyminimalbodily-mental activity:“itwasjustcharging;Ihadnotechniqueoranythingto makeit[thebattery]lastlonger.(...)Itwassimple”.Insomecases, itwastheobjectitselfthatrequestedtobecharged,bybeeping whenitsbatterywasrunningdown.Thus,asClarasuggested,they didnotneedtohavethatontheirminds.

Whenthe adolescents of ourstudy began having theirﬁrst mobilephones,thesedeviceswerealreadypresentintheir every-daylives.Manyoftheirolderfamilymembersownedone,andsome oftheirschoolmateswerealsobeginningtohavetheirown.Inthis socio-culturalcontext,theseobjectswerecomingtoberegardedas desirable,eventhoughtheirusewasverylimitedandhadnotbeen integratedwithotherpracticessuchascontactingtheirfriendsor social networking.AsMadalena toldus,sheasked fora mobile phonewhenshewasaroundtenyearsoldbecausesomeofher schoolmatesalreadyhadone.Butshe“didn’tevenuseit.”“Itwas justtocarryitwithme.(...)ItwasjusttosayIhadone.”

Thus, despitethepotentialfor agencyof bodies,objectsand socio-culturalcontexts,theinterconnectionsbetweenthemwere notindeedestablishedtothepointofformingpracticesofcharging andmanagingthepowerofmobilephones.Theelementsexisted buthadnotyetbeenintegrated[43].Inthefollowingsectionwe lookattheprocessofcreatinglinksbetweentheseelements.

4.2. Accelerationofrhythmandestablishmentoflinks

Mobilephoneshavegonethroughsignificantchangesinrecent years.Sincetheintroductionofthefirstsmartphones,notjusttheir physical characteristics(size,screens,keyboards)and operating systems(withincreasingprocessingpower,memoryandfeatures, functionsand applicationsavailable)havechangedsignificantly, batterieshavealsoevolved.Batteriesarenowthinner,lighter,have highercapacityandtakelesstimetocharge.However,the increas-ingfunctionalityofsmartphoneshastakenatollonbatterypower [8,1,17].Ifoldermobilephonescouldrunforseveraldaysbefore theyneededtoberecharged,veryoftensmartphonesneeddaily charging.

Mobiletelephony’smaterialcontexthasalsochanged consid-erably,asthedevelopmentofwirelessinfrastructureshasallowed forincreasingspeedandwidercoverage.Mostteenagerswe inter-viewedhavelimitedaccesstotheinternetontheirmobilephones duetoitshighcost.ThisencouragesthemtorelyonWi-Finetworks, whichareincreasinglyavailableinpublicspaces,suchas commer-cialcenters,publictransport,andsoforth.Thematerialcontextof schoolshasalsoevolved.Followingagovernmentdecision,since early2006allpublicschoolsinPortugalofferfreewireless broad-bandaccesstotheinternet.Despite somecomplaintsregarding speed,thisinfrastructurestrengthenedadolescents’mobilephone usethroughout the day,and even during classes, regardlessof schools’regulationsforbiddingusesnotrelatedtoclasses.Infact, 90.4%ofoursurveyrespondentssaidthattheyusetheirmobile phonesatschool,nearlyasmuchasathome(90.7%).

Moreover, inasmuch as mobile phones have a diversity of featurescommontootherinformationandcommunication tech-nologies, suchasthe ability toplay music and video, cameras, games,accesstotheinternet,instantmessaging,email,andeven word processing and spreadsheet facilities, therelationshipsof thesedeviceswithothertechnologieshavealsochanged.Onthe

(6)

onehand,similaritiesbetweentechnologies(alsoregarding bat-teryuse)allowfortransfersofembodiedskillsandknow-how.On theotherhand,theincreasingmobilityofmobilephonesduetothe expansionofwirelessinfrastructures,togetherwiththeirgrowing multi-functionality,makethesedevicesapervasive“musthave”or an“addiction”,assometimesmentionedintheinterviews.Several adolescentstoldusthattheyevenpreferusingtheirsmartphone insteadofthecomputer,as thesmartphone isfaster and more practical.

“WiththemobilephoneIcanbeincontactwithpeople,andit’snot somuchbecauseofsocialnetworks,(...)butalsobecausenowthat Ihaveasmartphone,andthereareapplicationsforeverything...It alsohelpswithschoolwork(...).Themobilephonebasicallyhelps mewitheverything.IfIneedsomehelp,ifIneedtobereminded ofsomethingtodo,ifIneedtotalktosomeone,Iusethephone.” (Bruno)

Thus,theagencyofbothobjectsandmaterialcontextbecome visible.Asthemulti-functionalityofsmartphones,togetherwith theirhighportability,makethemindispensableobjects,therhythm oftheiruseisaccelerated.Temporalpatternsofnon-usearenow shorter.Indeed,theownersofoldermobilephonesattributetheir lackofengagementwiththesedevicestothefactthattheydonot havethefeaturesofnewermobilephones.ThecaseofAntónio, whoownsanoutdatedmobilephone,illustratesthis.Headmitted thathisdeviceisnotveryimportanttohimbecauseitisnot a smartphone.Ifitwas,hebelieveshewoulduseitmore.Asitis not,hereliesonthecomputerandthetelevisionmorethanother interviewees.Thusthenewfeaturesofsmartphonescontributeto acceleratingtherhythmofuse.

Inorderforthisaccelerationtohappen,linksneedtobe estab-lishedbetweenobjectandbody.Asseveralintervieweestoldus, sincetheyhaveasmartphone,theyhavedevelopednewhabits. Thisincludestheadmittedly“annoying”(Cristiano)habitof check-ingtheirphoneoverandoveragain,evenknowingthatnothing hashappened,andthereisnomessage,asthedevicehasnot sig-naledanynotiﬁcation.AsCristianotoldus,“everyone”whousesa smartphonedevelopedthishabitofhandlingtheirsmartphones: they(himselfincluded) takeit, unlockit, andlook atit, asthe expectationofsomethinghappeningisanoverridingfeeling.As heexplained,thedevice“hassomanythings”,that“oneisalways expectingsomethingnew,especiallywhenonehasaccesstothe internet”.Theseembodiedskillsordispositionsforactionarenot merelybodyhabits.AsJúliatoldus,whenshedoesnothaveher mobilephonewithher,shecannotreceiveinformation, notiﬁca-tionsorinvitations,andthatmakesherfeel“excluded”.AsJúlia admitted,itbothershernottohavehermobilephoneinherpocket: “Iguessitisanaddiction.”Andasoneothergirltriedtoexplain, thehabitofhavingandusinghermobilephoneissoentangledwith herbodythat,whenshedoesnothaveitnexttoher,shejust“feels” itsabsence:

“WhenIdon’thavemymobilephone,ifIforgetit,Ifeelit,because it’salmostasifIdidn’thavesomethingnexttome,andthen...it’s afeeling...asit’salwaysclosetome,whenitisn’tinthepocketit’s afeelingandthenIremember.”(Diana)

Thus,thefeelingofaneedtohavethemobilephonealways availablebecomesembodied.Thisembodimentisvisibleinother ways.Severalintervieweesdescribedhowtheytakecareinorder tokeeptheirmobilephonesalwaysclosetothem,whetherintheir pocketsorintheirbags,wherevertheygo(sometimesevenwhen theytakeashower),andalsotheirstrategiestoneverforgetit(such asputtingitonthebedwhiletheyaregettingdressedinthe morn-ingtomakeitmorevisible).Topickitupandtocarryitwiththem “isthatautomaticthing”asDanielaexplains.Someofthemalso

admittogoingbackhometopickitupiftheyhappentoforgetit onthewayout—eveniftheyarerunninglate.

Furthermore,thesocio-culturalcontexthasalsochanged.Now thereareclearnormsregardingwhatisadesirablemobilephone, andwhatisnot.Agirlweinterviewedillustratedthiswellwhen sheadmittedthatherdreamwastoownaniPhone,becausethat isthemobilephone“everyonewantstohave”.Onthecontrary, havingamobilephoneliketheoneofAntónio’sisoftencriticized bythepeergroup-oldermodelsofmobilephonesarereferredto asbeing“rotten”or“fromtheStoneAge”.Hence,thesocio-cultural contextshapesmobilephoneusebypressuringadolescentstoward demonstratingtheirconformitywithsharedvaluesandnorms.On theonehand,thatisthecaseforowningcertaintypesofmobile phones,suchasthelatestsmartphones,especiallyfromtheleading brands.Indeed,asobservedbyGram-Hanssen[20],mobilephones seemtobehighlyloadedwithstatusandsymbols,andteenagers with“embarrassing”mobilephonesusethemlessfrequently.On theotherhand,another kindof peerpressure observedshapes thedisplayof adesirable youthfullifestyle.Duetotheir multi-functionalityandportability,mobilephonesareavaluableobject forthatpurpose. Theirabilitytophotographandrecordvideos, andtoimmediatelyuploadthemthroughsocialnetworking appli-cations,providethepossibilitytoshow(andprove)attendanceata musicfestival,thetastingofadelicacyoreventhemostbanal(non-) events.Theneedtocontinuallyfeedsocialmediaassumestherefore intensiveuseofthesedevices.Ourintervieweesdescribed(often witha critical slant) many performances enacted by teenagers throughtheuseofmobilephonesinordertobeconsidered“social” orpopular,suchasintensivelytakingpicturesofthemselves (self-ies)andimmediatelypostingthemonsocialmedialikeFacebookor Instagram.Inadifferentway,thesocio-culturalcontextalso pres-suresthemtowarddisplayingintensiveuseofmobilephones,as thisisconnotedwithhavingmanyfriendstotalkto.Indeed,the highnumberofSMStextmessagesreportedinoursurveytobesent everydaysuggestssomerespondentsmighthaveoverestimated that,asinsomecasestheyindicatedseveralhundreds.2

These findings show how the co-evolutionof these diverse agencies establishes links between the features of the object (smartphone),itsmaterialsurroundings(wirelessinfrastructure), theusers’bodies (embodiedhabits)andthesocio-cultural con-text(norms,values).Intensifiedmobilephoneusefitseveryday life’stemporalpatterns(e.g.,wakingupandgettingreadytogo to school, commuting, classes and breaks as well as different weekday/weekend uses)and spaces (e.g., home, school). How-ever,temporalandspatialpatternsofmobilephoneuseneedto besynchronizedwith(shorter)batterylifecycles.Therefore, bat-terypowerneedstobeorchestratedinaccordancewithmultiple circumstances,sincein ordertoaccomplishthis accelerationof rhythm,chargingupthephone’sbatteryandmanagingitspower becomesakeyperformanceissue.Practicesofbatterymanagement emerge.

4.3. Normalization

Astheuseofthemobilephoneacceleratesitsrhythmandthose threedimensionsareactivelyinterconnected,wemayobservethe formation of practices of chargingand managingthepower of mobilephones.Smartphone’sfeatures suchastouchscreen dis-plays, multiplenetwork connections,location technologies and operating systems signiﬁcantlyincrease their energy consump-tioncomparedtolesssophisticatedmobilephones.Thisdemand

2_Due_to_a_great_dispersion_of_results,_we_consider_the_median_instead_of_the_mean: thus,halfofrespondentssaidthattheysend50orlessSMSmessageseveryday.The highestfrequency(mode)is100SMSsenteveryday.

(7)

Table1

Managementofmobilephonefeaturesorfunctionsinordertomakethebatterylast longer(n=748).6 Frequency % Always 30.7 Veryfrequently 22.8 Frequently 18.6 Notfrequently 12.1 Rarely 7.4 Never 8.4

forpowerisincreasedbythefactthatmanyapplicationsrequire an internet connection. Smartphones are thus “power-hungry devices”[1].However,theirfunctioningdependsonbatterieswith limitedcapacities.Thebatterypoweristhereforea“fundamental andhighlyconstrainedresource”and“oneofthemostremarkable” constraintsaffectingtheuseofthesedevices[17].AsputbyCarroll andHeiser[8,p.1],thesmartphone’s“richfunctionalityincreases thepressureonbatterylifetime,anddeepenstheneedforeffective energymanagement.”

Ourinterviewees,especiallythosewhousesmartphones,are wellawareofthispowerhunger,andofthefactthatthesedevices needtobefedinordertostay“alive”.Interestingly,tosaythata phone“dies”whenitsbatteryrunsoutisacommonexpression. Andlikealivingorganism,themobilephone(especiallywhenitis “smart”)isalwaysconsumingpower,evenwhenidle.

“Thesemobilephones[smartphones]...evenifIdon’tuseitnow, itisdraining,becauseithastheappsrunning,itisalwaysactive andreceivingthings...”(Clara)

Giventhepervasivenessofmobilephonesinadolescents’ every-daylives,andthefactthattheyintegrateseveraloftheireveryday practices(e.g.,socialnetworking,webbrowsing,communicating withfamilyandfriends),ensuringfullychargedbatteriesbecomes aneed.Thisturnsintoaroutine,andatthesametimebattery man-agementskillsbecomeembodied.Infact,surveyresultssuggest thatmostteenagersinthis studyhavesomeembodied routines ofmanagingtheirmobilephone’sfeaturesorfunctionsinorderto makethebatterylastlonger,as53.5%saythattheyalwaysorvery frequentlydothis.Whilst8.4%saythattheyneverdoit,weshould notethatthisincludesthenumberofrespondents(3.1%)reporting notusingamobilephone(seeTable1).

Bruno’scaseisagoodillustrationofhowthispracticeof charg-ing and managing thepower of the mobilephone is indeed a bodily-mentalperformance.Heexplainedthathisconcernabout thebatteryinduceshimtoregularlycheckitsremainingpower; basedonthatandonwhatheexpectstodothroughouttheday untilhearriveshome(wherehecanchargehisbattery),he calcu-lateshowheshouldusehisphoneinorderalwaystohavebattery power.

“Iusuallymanagemybattery.Ihaveaconcern,sotospeak,about mybattery.IseetheamountofbatteryIhaveleft.Forinstance,I have70%andIthinkwhatamIgoingtodofromnowon(...)until Igethome...(...)andIthink«thisisenoughtousetherestofthe day»or«Ionlyhave30%»,(...)[if]Idon’twanttospendmorethan 10%,Igetto10%andIstop.ThenIproceedmoreorlessasif... well,Imakeanestimationandsee...(...)IfIhave30%power,I don’tneedanyofthat[listeningtomusicwhilstwalking],man,I’ll saveabitofpower,andwon’tlistentomusicforawhile,there’s noharminthat...I’malwayscheckingmybatteryforwhatIneed, andInevergothomewithlessthan20%ofpoweronmyphone.” (Bruno)

6_M₌_4.32,_SD₌_1.59₍₁₌_never;₆₌_always).

Besidesthecurtailmentactsmentionedinthisquote,diverse otheractivitiescorrespondtobatterymanagementskills,suchas turningofffunctionsand featureswhentheyarenotnecessary. Forexample,severalintervieweessaidthattheyturnonthe“ﬂight mode”(althoughusingthisfunctioninawaydifferentthanthat intendedbythedesigners)whentheyareseekingtoextendthe poweroftheirbatteries.Byswitchingofftheirnetwork connec-tions,this certainlysavespower.However,themobilephoneis programmedtooperatewithallitsfeatures,andunlesstheuser rememberstoturnthemoff,theyremainactive.

“WhenI’mnotusingit[Wi-Fi]Iturnitoff.Whathappensis,when I’matschoolIturnitonbecauseIknowIhaveinternet,but[later] whenIrealizethatitison,andhadn’tseenit,Iturnitoff.”(Daniela) Addingtotheseskills,someintervieweesrefertoapplications orfeaturesintegratedinmobilephonesthatallowpowersaving, suchasan“ecomode”thatlowersscreenbrightnessandturnsoff Wi-Ficonnections,oranapplicationthataccordingtoBrunocuts offthepowersupplyfromthesocketwhenthebatteryischarged. “Ihaveanappthatcontrolsthat,whenitreaches100%overcharges fortwominutesandthenthatappcutstheconnectionbetweenthe mobilephoneandthechargeranditdoesn’tchargeanymore.That isveryconvenienttomebecausethiswayIcanchargeitduring thenight;afterIhavedrainedthebatterythroughouttheday,Igo tosleep(...)andIchargeit(...).”(Bruno)

As managing the power of theirmobile phones becomes a widespreadpracticeand anembodied habit,ﬁndingthemselves deprivedof using theirmobilephonesbecausetheyran outof powerisnotafrequentsituation.Actually,accordingtoour sur-veyﬁndings,21.5%saytheyareveryofteninthissituation,while 35.9%claimthatthis“never”or“rarely”happenstothem(M=3.24, SD=1.44).3_Girls_might_be_less_skilled_in_managing_battery_power,

astheirmobilephonesmore oftenrunout ofpower(M=3.37; SD=1.44)compared toboys(M=3.13;SD=1.42).4 _To_avoid_this

situation,manyofthemchargetheirmobilephonessevendaysa week(M=6.39;SD=5.22).Indeed,manyintervieweestoldusthat theychargeitovernight,whiletheyareasleep.Again,girlscharge theirmobilephonebatteriesmoreoften(M=6.51;SD=3.45)than boys(M=5.74;SD=3.08).5

Thesepracticesarenotnecessarilyorientedtoenergyefﬁciency. Forexample,Raquelexplainedthatsometimessheusesher com-puterinsteadofthemobilephonetoavoid“drainingthebattery”of thelatter.Filipashowedthatsheisonlyconcernedaboutensuring thefunctionalityofhermobilephone:

“SometimesIliketousethemobilephonewhileit’schargingup. BecausethiswayI’mnotrunningdownthebattery!”(Filipa) Furthermore,asBarbaratoldus,somesmartphones’batteries “aremeanttonotlastlong”—onlyoneday.Thispointstoanother formofmaterialagency—thefactthatbatteriesbecomeless efﬁ-cient over time. This encourages performances which prevent batterieswearingout,asalmostalwaysthisimpliesthe replace-mentofthemobilephone.

“(...)beforebuyingItalkedwithmyfatheraboutthemobilephone andhetoldmethattopreventiPhones’batterieswearingoutthey havetofullydischarge,runallthewaydown;otherwisethebattery willbecomewornout.SoIalwaysdidthat:useituntilitrunsout andthenfullychargeit.”(Bárbara)

3_The_response_scale_of_these_questions_varies_between₁_(never)_and₆_(always). 4_This_difference_is_{statistically}_signiﬁcant_(t₍₇₃₇₎₌_2.30;_p_<_.05).

(8)

However,mosttimesthesepracticesdonotseemtobebased onwell-grounded,formalknowledge,butonpracticalknowledge andprocessesofinformallearning,asmanydonot“wastetime searching”(Daniela)forinformationonbatterymanagement.And often“myths”orjokescirculateamongadolescents.AsJúliatold us,sometimesherfriendssuggesteithertotrytoputthebatteryin thefreezerortowarmitupinordertomakeitlastlonger.

5. Conclusion

Thisanalysisshowstheemergenceandnormalizationof prac-ticesofchargingandmanagingthepowerofmobilephonesamong adolescents.Atanearlystage,despitethefactthatmobilephones arealready present in theireveryday lives,their bodily-mental skillsregardingtheuseofthesedevices(and,moreimportantly, theirpowerconsumption)areelementary.Thereisalreadya socio-culturalcontextfavorabletotheuseofmobilephones,butbodies, objectsandsocio-culturalcontextarenotsufﬁcientlyinterwoven. Datashowthatwhenmostintervieweesbeginusinga smart-phone,thereisaprocessofaccelerationoftheirrhythmofmobile phoneandbatteryuse.Severalelementsconvergeandﬂowinto theestablishmentofinterconnectionsbetweenbodies,objectsand socio-culturalcontext.Thustheneedtoorchestratebatterypower togetherwiththesedifferentagenciesleadstotheformationof practicesofchargingandmanagingthepowerofmobilephones.

Theprocessofnormalization(andreproduction)ofthese prac-ticesthenallowsthesuccessfulintegrationofmobilephonesinto everydaylife.Indeedwhenthesepracticesdonotbecomenormal, tensionand disruptioncanemerge.Aswhen themobilephone needstoberechargedearlierthanexpectedor achargeris not available,co-dependentpracticesmaybeaffectedorthwarted.

Practices of charging and managing battery power include techniquesthatenhanceenergyefficiency(suchaslowering unnec-essary screen brightness), curtailment measures (such as not listeningtomusic)oractionsthatdonotsaveanyenergy(simply chargingthebatterysooner,evenifithassubstantialenergyleft,or usinganotherdevice,likeanMP3player).Itisparticularlyclearthat girlsgetintothehabitofchargingthebatteryovernightmore eas-ilythanlearninghowtomanagebatterypowermoreefficiently. Thus, thenormalizationof these practicesdoes notnecessarily bring a positive outlook toward the transitionto a sustainable energysystem.Practicesofchargingandmanagingbatterypower areinstrumentalinsecuringthefunctioningofanobjectwhichis keyforperformingothermeaningfulco-dependentpractices(e.g., socialnetworking),butnotmeanttoreduceenergyconsumption. Asthesepracticesaremostly orientedtowardsecuringthe ser-vicesdesired,adolescentsarenotnecessarilyincorporatingskills anddispositionstowardenergyefficiency.

Furthermore,itisverylikelythattheproliferationof technolo-giesusingbatteriesineverydaylifewillcontinuetoincreaseinthe future.Withoutchangesintheinterconnectionsbetweenbodies, objectsandsocio-culturalcontextsit is unlikelythat the trans-ferof thesepractices toothertechnologieswillresultinhigher energyefﬁciency.Infact,asthisstudyshows,these interconnec-tionshavebeenco-evolvinginwaysthatenhancecontinuoususe andintensiﬁedintegrationofdigitaltechnologiesintoeverydaylife and,therefore,moreenergyconsumption.

However, as observed by Christensen et al. [11], although teenagers’awarenessofenergyconsumptionassociatedwiththe useofinformationandcommunicationtechnologiesisquite lim-ited,theirexperienceswithmobiledevicesprovidethempractical knowledgeabouttheelectricityconsumptionofthesedevices.Thus thereisapossibilitythatundersomecircumstancesthesepractices mightprovidepowermanagementskillsapplicabletotheuseof othertechnologies.Inanycase,asthe“practicalmastery”[29]of managingbatterypowerismainlyacquiredthroughtheexperience

ofmobilephonehandling,energyefﬁciencymightbepromoted whendesigningtheseobjectsbymakingpowermanagementmore intuitiveandeasytouse.

A previousstudyshowed thatPortuguese teenagersare not proactiveregardingenergysaving,especiallywhenitisrelatedto digitaltechnologiesduetotheirimportanceintheireverydaylife [53].ThisisinlinewithwhathasbeenobservedinotherEuropean countries[11]andwesurmisethatitmaynotbemuchdifferent fromotherurbancontemporarysocieties.However,weshouldbear inmindthespeciﬁcityofthislifestage.Itwouldbeworth carry-ingoutfurtherstudiesonwhathappenstothesepractices’careers whenthesepractitionersgetolderandtheybuildnewlinksintheir livesbetweenpracticesandtheirinnerelements.

Acknowledgments

TheauthorsareverygratefultoKirstenGram-Hanssen,the edi-torsofthisspecialissue,andtwoanonymousreviewersfortheir valuable comments and generous suggestions. The results pre-sentedarepartofaresearchprojectdevelopedwiththesupport oftheInstituteofSocialSciences,UniversityofLisbon,andfunded bythePortugueseFoundationforScienceandTechnologyunder theawardEXPL/IVC-SOC/2340/2013.

References

[1]A.Abdelmotalib,Z.Wu,Powerconsumptioninsmartphones(hardware behaviourism),Int.J.Comput.Sci.Issues9(3)(2012)161–164.

[2]M.Akrich,Thede-scriptionoftechnicalobjects,in:W.Bijker,J.Law(Eds.), ShapingTechnology/BuildingSociety,MITPress,Cambridge,1992.

[3]N.Banerjee,A.Rahmati,M.Corner,S.Rollins,L.Zhong,etal.,Usersand batteries:interactionsandadaptiveenergymanagementinmobilesystems, in:J.Krumm(Ed.),UbiComp2007UbiquitousComputing,Springer-Verlag BerlinHeidelberg,Berlin,2007,pp.217–234.

[4]T.Berker,M.Hartmann,Y.Punie,K.Ward,Introduction,in:T.Berker,Y. Hartmann,K.Ward(Eds.),DomesticationofMediaandTechnology,Open UniversityPress,NewYork,2006,pp.1–17.

[5]P.Bourdieu,OutlineofaTheoryofPractice,CambridgeUniversityPress, Cambridge,1977.

[6]P.Bourdieu,LeSensPratique,Minuit,Paris,1980.

[7]P.Bourdieu,Meditac¸õesPascalianas,Celta,Oeiras,1998.

[8]A.Carroll,G.Heiser,Ananalysisofpowerconsumptioninasmartphone, USENIXTAC’10Proceedingsofthe2010USENIXannualtechnicalconference (2010).

[9]M.Castells,M.Fernández-Ardèvol,J.L.Qiu,A.Sey,MobileCommunicationand Society:AGlobalPerspective,MITPress,Cambridge,2007.

[10]T.H.Christensen,‘Connectedpresence’indistributedfamilylife,NewMedia Soc.11(3)(2009)433–451.

[11]T.H.Christensen,R.Mourik,S.Breukers,T.Mathijsen,H.Heuve,Youngpeople, ICTandenergy—statusandtrendsinyoungpeople’suseandunderstandingof ICTandenergyconsumption:D2.1Technicalreportontheorganizationand outcomesoffocusgroupsandthemappingexercise,IntelligentEnergyEur. (2014).

[12]T.H.Christensen,I.Ropke,CanpracticetheoryinspirestudiesofICTsin everydaylife?in:B.Brauchler,J.Postill(Eds.),TheorisingMediaandPractice, BerghahnBooks,NewYork,2010,pp.233–256.

[13]M.Coleman,N.Brown,A.Wright,S.K.Firth,Information,communicationand entertainmentapplianceuse—insightsfromaUKhouseholdstudyEnergy Buildings54(2012)61–72.

[14]F.Colombo,L.Fortunati(Eds.),BroadbandSocietyandGenerationalChanges, vol.5,PeterLang.,Frankfurt,2011.

[15]T.Crosbie,Householdenergyconsumptionandconsumerelectronics:the caseoftelevision,EnergyPolicy36(2008)2191–2199.

[16]A.Fehske,J.Malmodin,G.Biczók,Theglobalfootprintofmobile communications:theecologicalandeconomicperspective,IEEE CommunicationsMagazine2011(August)(2011)55–62.

[17]M.Ferroni,A.Cazzola,F.Trovò,D.Sciuto,M.D.Santambroglio,Onpowerand energyconsumptionmodelingforsmartmobiledevices,in:Proceedingsof the12thIEEEInternationalConferenceonEmbeddedandUbiquitous Computing(EUC),IEEE,2014,pp.273–280.

[18]D.K.Forgays,I.Hyman,J.Schreiber,Textingeverywhereforeverything: genderandagedifferencesincellphoneetiquetteanduse,Comput.Hum. Behav.32(2014)314–321.

[19]A.Giddens,TheConstitutionofSociety,PolityPress,Cambridge,1984.

[20]K.Gram-Hanssen,Teenageconsumptionofinformationandcommunication technology,ECEEE2005Proceedings.EuropeanCouncilforanEnergy EfﬁcientEconomy(2005).

(9)

[21]K.Gram-Hanssen,Standbyconsumptioninhouseholdsanalyzedwitha practicetheoryapproach,J.Ind.Ecol.14(1)(2009)150–165.

[22]K.Gram-Hanssen,Understandingchangeandcontinuityinresidentialenergy consumption,J.Consum.Cult.11(1)(2011)61–78.

[23]J.Gronow,A.Warde,Introduction,in:J.Gronow,A.Warde(Eds.),Ordinary Consumption,Routledge,London,2001,pp.1–8.

[24]L.Haddon,Socialmediaandyouth,in:R.Mansell,P.H.Ang(Eds.),The InternationalEncyclopediaofDigitalCommunicationandSociety,JohnWilley &Sons,2015,pp.1–9.

[25]M.Heikkinen,J.Nurminen,Measuringandmodelingmobilephonecharger energyconsumptionandenvironmentalimpact,ProceedingsIEEEWireless CommunicationsandNetworkingConference:Services,Application,and Business(2012)3194–3198.

[26]M.Heikkinen,J.Nurminen,T.Smura,H.Hammainen,Energyefﬁciencyof mobilehandsets:measuringuserattitudesandbehavior,Telemat.Inform.29 (2012)387–399.

[27]A.Horta,H.Wilhite,L.Schmidt,F.Bartiaux,Socio-technicalandcultural approachestoenergyconsumption:anintroduction,Nat.Cult.9(2)(2014) 115–121.

[28]IEA,GadgetsandGigawatsPoliciesforEnergyEfﬁcientElectronics, InternationalEnergyAgency,Paris,2009.

[29]T.Ingold,ThePerceptionoftheEnvironment,Routledge,London,2000.

[30]ITU,Mobile-broadbanduptakecontinuestogrowatdouble-digitrates. InternationalTelecommunicationsUnion.Availableonlineat:http://www. itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/ICTFactsFigures2014-e.pdf2014. [31]J.O.Jensen,K.Gram-Hanssen,I.Ropke,T.H.Christensen,Households’useof

informationandcommunicationtechnologies–afuturechallengeforenergy savings?ECEEE2009SummerStudy–Act!Innovate!Deliver!Reducing energydemandsustainably.Availableonlineat:http://vbn.aau.dk/ﬁles/ 75300895/ICTECEEE2009paper.pdf.</docref>2009.

[32]B.Latour,ReassemblingtheSocial.AnintroductiontoActor-Network-Theory, OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford,2005.

[33]C.Licoppe,‘Connected’presence:theemergenceofanewrepertoirefor managingsocialrelationshipsinachangingcommunicationtechnoscape, Environ.Plann.DSoc.Space22(2004)135–156.

[34]R.Ling,TheMobileConnection:TheCellPhone’sImpactonSociety,Elsevier, SanFrancisco,2004.

[35]R.Ling,Children,youthandmobilecommunication,J.ChildrenMedia1(1) (2007)60–67.

[36]R.Ling,B.Yttri,Hyper-coordinationviamobilephonesinNorway,in:J.Katz, Aakhus,M(Eds.),PerpetualContact:MobileCommunication,PrivateTalk, PublicPerformance,CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge,2002.

37]S.in:Livingstone,L.Haddon(Eds.),KidsOnline:OpportunitiesandRisksfor Children,ThePolicyPress,Bristol,2009.

[38]G.Mascheroni,A.Cuman,NetChildrenGoMobile:FinalReport,Educatt, Milano,2014,DeliverablesD6.4&D5.2.

[39]Ofcom,ChildrenandParents:MediaUseandAttitudesReportOfcom(2014). Availableonlineat:http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/ media-literacy/media-use-attitudes-14/Childrens2014Report.pdf. [40]S.Ortner,Thickresistance:deathandtheculturalconstructionofagencyin

Hymalayamountaineering,in:S.Ortner(Ed.),ThefateofCulture:Geertzand Beyond,UniversityofCaliforniaPress,Berkeley,1999,pp.136–165.

[41]A.Paiano,G.Lagioia,A.Cataldo,Acriticalanalysisofthesustainabilityof mobilephoneuse,Resour.Conserv.Recy.73(2013)162–171.

[42]M.Pantzar,Toolsortoys—inventingtheneedfordomesticappliancesin postwarandpostmodernFinland,J.Advertising32(1)(2003)83–93.

[43]M.Pantzar,E.Shove,Understandinginnovationinpractice:adiscussionof theproductionandre-productionofNordicwalking,Technol.Anal.Strateg. Manage.22(4)(2010)447–461.

[44]S.Pink,K.L.Mackley,Saturatedandsituatedexpandingthemeaningofmedia intheroutinesofeverydaylife,MediaCult.Soc.35(6)(2013)677–691.

[45]A.Rahmati,L.Zhong,Human–batteryinteractiononmobilephones,Pervasive Mob.Comput.5(2009)465–477.

[46]A.Reckwitz,Towardatheoryofsocialpractices:adevelopmentinculturalist theorizing,Eur.J.Soc.Theory5(2)(2002)243–263.

[47]I.Ropke,Theunsustainabledirectionalityofinnovation—theexampleofthe broadbandtransition,Res.Policy41(2012)1631–1642.

[48]I.Ropke,T.H.Christensen,J.O.Jensen,Informationandcommunication technologies—anewroundofhouseholdelectriﬁcation,EnergyPolicy38 (2010)1764–1773.

[49]I.Ropke,T.H.Christensen,EnergyimpactsofICT—insightsfromaneveryday lifeperspective,Telemat.Inform.29(2012)348–361.

[50]I.Ropke,T.H.Christensen,Transitionsinthewrongdirectiondigital technologiesanddailylife,in:E.Shove,N.Spurling(Eds.),Sustainable Practices.SocialTheoryandClimateChange,Routledge,Oxon,2013.

[51]M.Sahakian,H.Wilhite,Makingpracticetheorypracticable:towardsmore sustainableformsofconsumption,J.Consum.Cult.14(1)(2014)25–44.

[52]T.Schatzki,SocialPractices:AWittgensteinianApproachtoHumanActivity andtheSocial,CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge,1996.

[53]L.Schmidt,A.Horta,A.Correia,S.Fonseca,Generationalgapsandparadoxes regardingenergyconsumptionandsaving,Nat.Cult.9(2)(2014)183–203.

[54]E.Shove,Comfort,CleanlinessandConvenience:TheSocialOrganisationof Normality,Berg,OxfordandNewYork,2003.

[55]E.Shove,M.Pantzar,Consumers,producersandpractices.Understandingthe inventionandreinventionofNordicwalking,J.Consum.Cult.5(1)(2005) 43–64.

[56]E.Shove,M.Pantzar,M.Watson,TheDynamicsofSocialPractice.Everyday LifeandHowitChanges,Sage,London,2012.

[57]E.Shove,G.Walker,Whatisenergyfor?Socialpracticeandenergydemand, TheoryCult.Soc.31(5)(2014)41–58.

[58]K.Sorensen,Domestication:theenactmentoftechnology,in:T.Berker,Y. Hartmann,K.Ward(Eds.),DomesticationofMediaandTechnology,Open UniversityPress,NewYork,2006,pp.40–61.

[59]J.Suckling,J.Lee,Redeﬁningscope:thetrueenvironmentalimpactof smartphones?Int.J.LifeCycleAss.20(2015)1181–1196.

[60]E.Thulin,B.Vilhelmson,Mobileseverywhere.Youth,themobilephone,and changesineverydaylife,Young15(3)(2007)235–253.

[61]G.Wallenborn,H.Wilhite,Rethinkingembodiedknowledgeandhousehold consumption,EnergyRes.Soc.Sci.1(2014)56–64.

[62]G.Walker,Thedynamicsofenergydemand:change,rhythmand synchronicity,EnergyRes.Soc.Sci.1(1)(2014)49–55.

[63]A.Warde,Consumptionandtheoriesofpractice,J.Consum.Cult.5(2)(2005) 131–153.

[64]A.Warde,Aftertaste:culture,consumptionandtheoriesofpractice, J.Consum.Cult.14(3)(2014)279–303.

[65]H.Wilhite,Newthinkingontheagentiverelationshipbetweenend-use technologiesandenergy-usingpractices,EnergyEfﬁciency1(2008)121–130.

[66]H.Wilhite,Energyconsumptionasculturalpractice:implicationsfortheory andpolicyofsustainableenergyuse,in:S.Strauss,S.T.RuppLove(Eds.), CulturesofEnergy:Power,practices,technologies,LeftCoastPress,Walnut Crek,2013,pp.60–72.

[67]H.Wilhite,NakagamiHidetoshi,TakashiMasuda,YukikoYamaga,Hiroshi Haneda,Across-culturalanalysisofhouseholdenergy-usebehaviorinJapan andNorway,EnergyPolicy24(9)(1996)795–803.

[68]J.Yu,E.Williams,M.Ju,Analysisofmaterialandenergyconsumptionof mobilephonesinChina,EnergyPolicy38(2010)4135–4141.