Actor-Network Theory (ANT), developed by scholars like Bruno Latour, Michel Callon, and John Law, is a sociological and philosophical framework for understanding how social and material worlds are co-constructed through networks of relationships. It challenges traditional distinctions between human and nonhuman entities, treating both as "actants" that shape outcomes in interconnected systems. Below, I provide a concise explanation of ANT, its key concepts, applications, and critical considerations, tailored to your context of knowledge production and epistemic commons.

Core Concepts of ANT

• Actants: ANT posits that both humans (e.g., scientists, policymakers) and nonhumans (e.g., technologies, documents, natural phenomena) are actants—entities capable of influencing a network. For example, in knowledge production, a scientific paper or a lab instrument is as much an actant as the researcher writing or using it.
• Networks: Social phenomena emerge from dynamic networks of actants. These networks are not static but constantly negotiated and stabilized through interactions. For instance, a university’s knowledge production involves networks of professors, students, books, computers, funding, and institutional policies.
• Symmetry: ANT rejects privileging human agency over nonhuman contributions. A microscope’s precision is as critical to scientific discovery as the scientist’s expertise, leveling traditional hierarchies.
• Translation: Actants align through "translation," where interests are negotiated to form a cohesive network. This includes problematization (defining a problem), interessement (engaging others), enrollment (assigning roles), and mobilization (sustaining the network). 
• Black Boxing: When a network stabilizes, complex processes are simplified into a "black box"—a taken-for-granted fact or tool. For instance, a widely accepted scientific theory becomes a black box until challenged by new evidence or actants.

Grok