Metrics and other forms of quantification as technologies for rendering knowledge as measurable, usually quantitative “data,” in simplified, legible, and portable ways, have become increasingly central within discussions of the economy, and these quantitative tools have equally become the subject of anthropological discussion and critique. The motivations behind and effects of numbers in the field of “responsible finance,” already a space where the “ethical claims” of the economy are made explicit, have themselves become the center of ethical discussion, both within the field of responsible finance and among those anthropologists studying that field. The authors of this article (one an academic, one a practitioner in impact investing, and one a hybrid academic-practitioner in climate finance) respond to the argument that we suggest is implicitly or explicitly present in most of the work around quantification and metrics, namely, that quantification acts as a kind of “antipolitics machine,” rendering political problems as technical ones and simplifying complex realities.

中文翻译：

---

科伦坡夫人的反政治机器：负责任金融中的定量数据

度量和其他形式的量化作为以简化、易读和便携的方式将知识呈现为可测量的、通常是定量的“数据”的技术，在经济讨论中变得越来越重要，这些定量工具同样成为人类学的主题讨论和批评。“负责任的金融”领域已经成为明确经济“道德主张”的领域，其背后的动机和数字的影响本身已成为道德讨论的中心，无论是在负责任的金融领域还是在其他领域。那些研究该领域的人类学家。本文的作者（一位是学者，一位是影响力投资的从业者，一位是气候金融领域的混合型学术实践者）回应了我们认为在大多数有关量化和指标的工作中隐含或明确存在的论点，也就是说，量化充当了一种“反政治机器”，将政治问题转化为技术问题，并简化了复杂的现实。