Sustainability Language
Assemblage thinking
A social-theory approach, derived from Deleuze and Guattari, that analyses socio-ecological arrangements as fluid wholes assembled from heterogeneous human and non-human parts.
Definition
An analytical approach originating in Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari's *A Thousand Plateaus* (1980) and developed by Manuel DeLanda and others, which treats social entities — cities, markets, institutions, socio-ecological systems — as "assemblages": contingent wholes whose heterogeneous components can be detached, replaced and recombined, and whose properties emerge from relations rather than essences.
References
Origin in Deleuze and Guattari (1980); development by Latour and DeLanda; agencement translation issue; applications in social science.
Overview
What it means
The English term translates the French *agencement*, which carries senses of arrangement and agency that "assemblage" only partly captures. Applied in sustainability and transition studies, assemblage thinking directs attention to how technologies, infrastructures, policies, people and ecosystems are contingently stitched together — and therefore how they might be reconfigured.
How it is used
Researchers use the approach to study energy transitions, urban sustainability, conservation projects and supply chains as assemblages, highlighting emergence, fluidity and the role of non-human elements. It offers an alternative to system metaphors with fixed boundaries.
Why it matters
The approach underpins a strand of critical sustainability scholarship: if socio-ecological arrangements are assemblages rather than fixed structures, transformation means disassembling and reassembling relations — a useful frame for thinking about systemic change, though critics find it vague for practical decision-making.
Review
Public comments appear only after editor acceptance. Draft comments stay in the review queue.
Reviewers choose the definition or an overview paragraph, leave a comment or replacement, and attach evidence or a source link.
Editors compare reviewer cards side by side. AI may help find agreement, conflicts, unsupported claims and possible source issues.
Only an editor-accepted synthesis changes the public page. Reviewer identities are shown only with consent and an editorial decision to attribute them.
Submitted reviews stay private until an editor decides whether to accept and attribute them.
Contribute to this entry
Help improve this definition
Your contribution is private while it is checked. Nothing changes on this page unless an editor accepts it.
Loading verified endorsements… Endorsements are not votes and never determine publication.
Endorse this definition
Endorse the exact version shown here. This is not a vote, and publication remains an editorial decision.
Review board
Comment on a specific line. Each reviewer stays separate until an editor accepts a merged draft.
Each person comments on the definition or overview in their own draft card, with role, evidence and suggested wording kept together.
AI can compare comments against the current text, flag conflicting claims, surface missing evidence and identify where reviewers agree.
An editor merges compatible suggestions into a draft change, checks sources, records disagreements and decides what can be published.