Appalachian School of Technologies & Arts

converging our yesterday, now & futureProposed Steps & Structure

What is Community-based Innovation?

Very simply, invention + innovation to solve issues in the community. Other drives for invention or innovation are secondary or not on the table.

For example: Open Source Ecology

Open Source Ecology is a network of farmers, engineers, and supporters that for the last two years has been creating the Global Village Construction Set, an open source, low-cost, high performance technological platform that allows for the easy, DIY fabrication of the 50 different Industrial Machines that it takes to build a sustainable civilization with modern comforts. The GVCS lowers the barriers to entry into farming, building, and manufacturing and can be seen as a life-size lego-like set of modular tools that can create entire economies, whether in rural Missouri, where the project was founded, in urban redevelopment, or in the developing world.

Another model of community based innovation

Barefoot College is a non-governmental organization that has been providing basic services and solutions to problems in rural communities for more than 40 years, with the objective of making them self-sufficient and sustainable. These Barefoot solutions can be broadly categorized into the delivery of Solar Electrification, Clean Water, Education, Livelihood Development, and Activism. With a geographic focus on the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), we believe strongly in Empowering Women as agents of sustainable change.

Barefoot College

Rural men and women irrespective of age, who are barely literate or not at all, and have no hope of getting even the lowest government job, are being trained to work as day and night school teachers, doctors, midwives, dentists, health workers, balsevikas, solar engineers, solar cooker engineers, water drillers, hand pump mechanics, architects, artisans, designers, masons, communicators, water testers, phone operators, blacksmiths, carpenters, computer instructors, accountants and kabaad-se-jugaad professionals.

Another example (several slides): Maker Lab

OwnershipAvoid silos; federate data - don't try to own data. Be transparent. Foster an ecosystem where all participants get rewarded, support all attempts at bettering communication Triple Open: Open Data, Open Code, Open ParticipationAllow ownership across all parties involved in all projects collectively, distribute work-load collectively; let team members dictate and establish their own strengths on their own. License free or open. Design PracticesBrainstorming, sketching and iterative concept development are encouraged. Provide support for ideation, respect and foster creativity and risk taking by taking smaller steps more often..

Wiki-LikeEverything should be a wiki. Everything should allow reverting. Deputize participants to help. Disambiguate related content; duplicate persons and the like with disambiguation pages.ConversationalEncourage real time discourse, encourage collaboration and open-ended conversation. Be humane. Be multi-modal and multi-gateway, multi-ligual and multi-faceted. VelocityAbide by agile development practices. Focus on one thing at a time, ship early and often. Be your own most loyal users. Provide feedback mechanisms early on, for team and stakeholders. Iterate quickly and often, take feedback and criticism and turn good projects into great ones.

Courtesy of greenelement

CommunityFocus on caring for our own communities first, then and only then do you grow outwards from our own community. Remember to appreciate those around you, encourage and validate the work of those around you.

Courtesy of Sifah

How Can Community-Based Innovation function?

A Proposal and Approach

1. Develop an instrument (method) or utilize a pre-existing instrument to evaluate community needs at the specific person, place, or group level.

Courtesy of CollectionAgency

Who is the community that needs assessed?

People or entity under $100k/year (so small local businesses can get included)

Top priority = lowest economic third

What counts as a need?

The BasicsOther people

Food enough to get old enough to have more people

Clean enough water

Clean enough soil to plant

Stuff to plant to grow (or food from some other source)

Protection from the elements

Okay, not many of us these days would be happy with that list being enough, yet those form a fairly basic list of how to ensure community survival.

Here is what that seems to take in the current American context OR:

The Real Deal (see the last slide for a list of references to back this up)Something meaningful for people to do together with other people

Geographic access to other communities with relative ease

Diverse economic possibilities, one economic sector does not dominate

Diverse knowledge and specializations

Political will to support the basics of and the real deal of community survival

Ways to solve the issues that go along with the basics & the real deal of community survival including educational, technological, creative & social structures

2. Determine process for prioritizing needs in order of urgency

Include many voices

Include a variety of democratic processes

Includes the voices of those in need

Courtesy of Shawn Haynes and Pablito_TR_Fabio_M

3. Gather to address needs through invention and innovation

Suggested approach of the Appalachian School of Technologies and Arts =

CBTA

Community-Based Technologies and Arts!

The Appalachian School of Technologies and Arts is the physical space for the gathering of people to apply CBTA (Community-Based Technologies and Arts) to local Basic Needs and Real Deals

Develops or uses instrument to assess and prioritize needs

Assembles people from all backgrounds interested or versed in traditional, proven, or emerging technologies and arts to design, plan, create, communicate, brainstorm, test responses

Assembles donated or loaned or bought resources needed to address that need

Tests and disperses innovation to address need

Evaluates the process, the production, the creation, and the implementation of the community-based solution/invention/innovation

Adjusts any step in the process, the creation, and the implementation based on feedback

Solutions and steps to CBTA solutions at the Appalachian School of Technologies and Arts are Open Source and protected
under Creative Commons licenses

What is Open Source?

In brief, it is a term applied to everything from software to art to mechanical inventions to politics.

In short, the goal of open source is to share blueprints, code, creation widely and without copyright or patent.

One way to ensure that a community-based solution is not picked up and patented is to place it under a Creative Commons license. More on the next slide.

Creative Commons

Creative Commons Licenses

Many factors to consider in licensing, but the main factors are:

1. Attribution Attribution. You let others copy, distribute, display, and perform your copyrighted work and derivative works based upon it but only if they give credit the way you request.

2. Noncommercial Noncommercial. You let others copy, distribute, display, and perform your work and derivative works based upon it but for noncommercial purposes only.

3. No Derivative Works No Derivative Works. You let others copy, distribute, display, and perform only verbatim copies of your work, not derivative works based upon it.

4. Share Alike Share Alike. You allow others to distribute derivative works only under a license identical to the license that governs your work.

Point 2 is the suggested mode for the Appalachian School of Technologies and Arts

You walk through the door or get involved with the Appalachian School of Technologies and Arts, you have agreed to Open Source Non-Commercial

Why?

Stay focused on addressing community needs

Don't get caught up in assigning or litigating bylines or credit

But what if some corporation makes one adjustment and steals your plans and uses them?

Larry Summers (Harvard President, speaking to the Winklevoss brothers who said they actually invented Facebook rather than Mark Zuckerberg): Everyone at Harvard is inventing something. Harvard undergraduates believe that inventing a job is better than finding a job. So I suggest again that the two of you come up with a new project. The Social Network, 2010.

Did the invention and/or innovation serve local community Basic Needs or Real Deal?

If yes, then move on to working together on inventing and innovating a new project for the next Basic Need or Real Deal.

Stay focused on the mission!! That is why we are here (positive)You can't fight the people with big pockets so don't (you you you is not why we are here; it's we we we. If that doesn't work for you, ASTA is not the right place for you.)

But again, why free?!

Platitudes like people only value what they pay for...not TRUE!!!

People value going to church and they don't have to pay to do that.

Education is free in the United States from Kindergarten till 12th grade, because in the 1950s and 1960s we as a society understood you needed at least a high school education to make it in life as we know it.

People value libraries

People value free concerts, free art walks, free public art, freeways (no toll!), etc.

Free is what it has to be for local people so everyone can be welcome and everyone can participate.

Photos courtesy of: Dan Gore, CallieDel Boa in & out, SweeTee10_56

How will you fund it then?

Like the places listed on this presentation fund theirsASTA will be a non-profit

ASTA will not take any money from government agencies and will be free of party politics

ASTA will engage active fundraising

ASTA will partner with willing partners as a block for non-gov't grants and proposals

ASTA will be funded largely by large donors

ASTA will not compete with local groups for fundsit will not pilfer your sources

A mix of volunteer labor and paid labor

Community involvement

Who's gonna start??

More about me here:http://www.linkedin.com/in/crystalallenecook

Committed to:Community assessment researchPlanningFriendraising and fundraisingImplementationStewardship

Next Steps:

1. Developing an instrument for or utilizing a community needs assessment at the individual household and business level2. Conducting the assessment3. Developing an instrument or utilizing an instrument to prioritize community needs4. Assembling people with an interest in or involved in traditional, proven, or emerging technologies and arts to invent and innovate based on these needs and documenting this process5. Procurring a place, funds, and resources for these people to work in and documenting this process (including community reactions, funder reactions, etc.)6. Developing or utilizing a workshare model for people to work from (the Maker Lab model comes quickly to mind)7. Assessing what progress or success or failure would mean in terms of this project8. Evaluating steps and the process along the way9. Assessing this pilot of community based technologies and arts as a replicable model

Are you in?

Go to

AppalachianSchoolofTechnologiesandArts.org

to learn more and to get involved!

References: Innovation, and Innovation & the Case for Physical Proximity

Ahlstrom, D. (2010). Innovation and Growth: How Business Contributes to Society. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3), 11-24.Barczak, G., & McDonough, E. F. (2003). Leading Global Product Development Teams. Research Technology Management, 46(6), 14-18.Bernstein, Radosevich, Clesca, Masco. (2008). Personality Predictors of Teamwork Behaviors and Decision-Making Style. Review of Business Research, Vol. 8 Issue 6, 205-210.Clason, D., & Dormody, T. (1994). Analyzing Data Measured by Individual Likert-Type Items. Journal of Agricultural Education, 35(4), 31-35.Coyle-Shapiro, J. A., & Conway, N. (2005). Exchange Relationships: Examining Psychological Contracts and Perceived Organizational Support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 774-781. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.774Ferrin, D. L., Dirks, K. T., & Shah, P. P. (2006). Direct and indirect effects of third-party relationships on interpersonal trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4), 870-883. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.870Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Unpacking the Concept of Virtuality: The Effects of Geographic Dispersion, Electronic Dependence, Dynamic Structure, and National Diversity on Team Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(3), 451-495.Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (2003). A Very Brief Measure of the Big Five Personality Domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504-528.Jan de Leede, Karolus O. Kraan, den Hengst, M., & van Hooff, M. L. M. (2008). Conditions for innovation behaviour of virtual team members: a 'high-road' for internationally dispersed virtual teams. Journal of eWorking, 2(1), 22-46.Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791-815.Langfred, C. W., & Moye, N. A. (2004). Effects of Task Autonomy on Performance: An Extended Model Considering Motivational, Informational, and Structural Mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 934-945. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.934Sobel Lojeski, K. (2006). Virtual Distance: A Proposed Model for the Study of Virtual Work. Dissertation.Lojeski, K., Reilly, R., & Dominick, P. (2006). The Role of Virtual Distance in Innovation and Success. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06) (pp. 25c-25c). Presented at the Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06), Kauia, HI, USA. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2006.484Lynn, G., & Reilly, R. (2002). How to build a blockbuster. Harvard Business Review, 80(10), 18.McCarthy, I. P., Tsinopoulos, C., Allen, P., & Rose-Anderssen, C. (2006). New Product Development as a Complex Adaptive System of Decisions. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(5), 437-456. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2006.00215.xMedcof, J. W. (2009). Managing Global Innovation. Edited by R. Boutellier, O. Gassmann and M. von Zedtwitz. R&D Management, 39(2), 225-226. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2009.00551.xMilton, F. Innovation Survey 52. London, Price WaterHouse. (2003).

Molina-Morales, F. X., & Martnez-Fernndez, M. T. (2009). Too much love in the neighborhood can hurt: how an excess of intensity and trust in relationships may produce negative effects on firms. Strategic Management Journal, 30(9), 1013-1023.Pauleen, D. J. (2003). An Inductively Derived Model of Leader-Initiated Relationship Building with Virtual Team Members. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(3), 227-256.Ruppel, C. P., & Harrington, S. J. (2000). The Relationship of Communication, Ethical Work Climate, and Trust to Commitment and Innovation. Journal of Business Ethics, 25(4), 313-328.Salkind, N. J. (2010). Encyclopedia of Research Design. SAGE.Santos, J., Doz, Y., & Williamson, P. (2004). Is Your Innovation Process Global? MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(4), 31-37.Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K. (2005). Managing Innovation, 3rd Edition, John Wiley & sons Ltd, UK.Vargas-Hernndez, J. G., Noruzi, M. R., & Narges Sariolghalam. (2010). Risk or Innovation, Which One Is Far more Preferable in Innovation Projects? International Journal of Marketing Studies, 2(1), 233-244.Bechtoldt MN, De Dreu CK, Nijstad BA, Choi HS. Motivated information processing, social tuning, and group creativity. J Pers Social Psychology. 2010 Oct;99(4):622-37.Garcia, R. and Calantone, R. (2002) A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review. The Journal of Product Innovation Management. 19: 110-132.Hamel, G. (2000). Waking Up IBM: how a gang of unlikely rebels transformed big blue. Harvard Business Review. 78 (4): 137 - 144Jenkins, R. V. (1987). Images and Enterprise: Technology and the American Photographic Industry, 1839-1925. The Johns Hopkins University Press.Krause, Peter. Fifty Years of Kodachrome, Modern Photography, 49:11, 47 114, October, 1985.Anderson, P & Tushman, M.L. (1990). Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: ACyclical Model of Technological Change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(4), 604-633.Blu Buhs, J. (2010). Wildmen on the Cyberfrontier: The Computer Geek as an Iteration in theAmerican Wildman Lore Cycle. Folklore, 121(1), 61-80.Brubach, Holly. Fear and Clothing: How the Cold War Sent Fashion into the Stratosphere.New York Times Magazine Fall 2008, Style: Womens Fashion: 21415.Downes, Lawrence. "A New Magazine's Rebellious Credo: Void the Warranty! - New YorkTimes." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 12 June 2005. Web. 8 May 2011. .Fueller F., Muehlbacher H., Matzler K., Jawecki G., Consumer Empowerment through InternetBased Co-creation. Journal of Management Information Systems. Winter 200910, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 71102.Gelber, Steven M. Hobbies: Leisure and the Culture of Work in America. New York: ColumbiaUP, 1999.

Headlee, Celeste. "Are You Sure You Own Your Stuff? : NPR." NPR : National Public Radio :News & Analysis, World, US, Music & Arts : NPR. Web. 3 May 2011. .Honey, M., Siegel, E. The Maker Movement. Education Week. 2/2/2011, Vol. 30 Issue 19, p3225, 2p.Jalopy, Mister. "Makezine.com: Owner's Manifesto." DIY Projects, Inspiration, How-tos, Hacks,Mods & More @ Makezine.com - Tweak Technology to Your Will. Web. 3 May 2011. ."O'Reilly Media: About O'Reilly." O'Reilly Media - Technology Books, Tech Conferences, IT Courses, News. Web. 10 May 2011. .Smith, Rochelle. Antislick to Postslick: DIY Books and Youth Culture Then and Now. TheJournal of American Culture. Volume 33, Number 3, September 2010. Von Hippel, Eric. Horizontal Innovation Networks-By and For Users Industrial & CorporateChange, Apr2007, Vol. 16 Issue 2, p293-315, 23pWosniak, Steve. IWoz: Computer Geek to Cult Icon. W.W. Norton, 2007.

References on Place, Appalachia, Economics, Technologies, Single Sector Economies, etc

Callon, Michel. The Law of the Markets. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 1998.Mirowski, Philip. Science-Mart: Privatizing American Science. Cambridge: Harvard, 2011.Porter, Theodore. Quantification and the Accounting Ideal in Science. Social Studies of Science 22 (1992): 633-652. Ravetz, Jerome R. Scientific Knowledge and its Social Problems. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971. Winner, Langdon. The Whale and the Reactor: a Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986.Breslau, Daniel. Economics Invents the Economy: Mathematics, Statistics, and Models in the Work of Irving Fisher and Wesley Mitchell. Theory and Society 32, no. 3 (2003): 379-411.Callon, Michel. What Does it Mean to Say That Economics is Performative? In Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics, edited by Donald MacKenzie, Fabian Muniesa and Lucia Siu, 311-357. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2007. Desrosieres, Alain. How to Make Things Which Hold Together: Social Science, Statistics and the State. Sociology of the Sciences 15 (1990): 195-218. Douglas, Mary and Aaron Wildavsky. Risk and Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984.Elam, Mark and Margareta Bertilsson. Consuming, Engaging and Confronting Science: The Emerging Dimensions of Scientific Citizenship. European Journal of Social Theory 6, no. 2 (2003): 233-251. Feenberg, Andrew. Questioning Technology. New York: Routledge, 1999. Gieryn, Thomas. Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists. American Sociological Review 48, no. 6 (1983): 781-95. Hines, Lawrence G. Precursors to Cost-Benefit Analysis in Early United States Public Investment Projects. Land Economics 49 (1973): 310-317.Jasanoff, Sheila, ed. States of Knowledge: Science, Power, and Political Culture. New York: Routledge, 2005. Jasanoff, Sheila. The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1994. May, Bruce E., Jeng-Chung V. Chen, and Kuang-Wei Wen. The Differences of Regulatory Models and Internet Regulation in the European Union and the United States, Information & Communications Technology Law 13, no. 3 (2004): 259.Porter, Theodore M. Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995. Scott, James. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998. Stone, Deborah. Policy Paradox: the Art of Political Decision Making. New York: Norton, 2001.Vaughan, Diane. The Role of the Organization in the Production of Techno-Scientific Knowledge. Social Studies of Science 29, no. 6 (1999): 913-943. Bell, Shannon. There Aint No Bond in Town Like There Used to Be: The Destruction of Social Capital in the West Virginia Coal Fields. Sociological Forum 24, no. 3 (Sept 2009): 631-657.Cunningham-Sabot, Emmanuele. Shrinking Cities in France and Great Britain: A Silent Process? In The Future of Shrinking Cities: Problems, Patterns and Strategies of Urban Transformation in a Global Context, Berkeley, CA, February 2007, by the Center for Global Metropolitan Studies, 17-28. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development and the Shrinking Cities International Research Network, 2009.

Turning Nonrenewable Natural Resources into Sustainable Wealth for West Virginia. West Virginia Center on Budget & Policy. January 2012.Feenberg, Andrew. From Essentialism to Constructivism: Philosophy of Technology at the Crossroads, adapted from Questioning Technology. London: Routledge, 1999, 183 236. Gordon, Tia. NSF Brings More Minorities to Science, Technology, Engineering, and MathematicsSTEM Fields. http://www.ihep.org/press-room/news_release-detail.cfm?id=96 (accessed October 30, 2013)Ravetz, Jerry (Jerome). The Post-normal Sciences of Precaution. Conference on Uncertainty and Precaution in Environmental Management. Water Science & Technology, 52, no. 6 (2005): 11-17.The World Bank, Europe and Central Asia Unit. Monotowns: Paths to Resilience: A Brief Review of International Experiences with Urban Regeneration, 2010.Di John, Jonathan. Is There Really a Resource Curse? A Critical Survey of Theory and Evidence. Global Governance 17, no. 2 (2011): 167-184. Duncan, Cynthia. Worlds Apart: Why Poverty Persists in Rural America. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999.Einsiedel, E., E. Jelse and T. Breck. Publics at the Technology Table: The Consensus Conference in Denmark, Canada, and Australia. Public Understanding of Science 10, no. 1 (2001): 83-98.Fisher, Stephen L., and Barbara Ellen Smith. Eds. Transforming Places: Lessons from Appalachia. Champaign-Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2012.Freudenburg, William. Addictive Economies: Extractive Industries and Vulnerable Localities in a Changing World Economy. Rural Sociology 57, no. 5 (1991): 305-332.Hughes, Thomas P. The Evolution of Large Technological Systems. In The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. Edited by Wiebe Bijker, Thomas Hughes, and Trevor Pinch, 51-82. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1987. Leadbetter, David. Single-Industry Resource Communities: 'Shrinking,' and the New Crisis of Hinterland Economic Development. In The Future of Shrinking Cities: Problems, Patterns and Strategies of Urban Transformation in a Global Context, Berkeley, CA, February 2007, by the Center for Global Metropolitan Studies, 89-100. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development and the Shrinking Cities International Research Network, 2009. Ledet, Richard. Correlates of Corruption. Public Integrity 13, no. 2 (2011): 149-162.Mitchell, Timothy. Carbon Democracy: Political Power in the Age of Oil. New York: Verso, 2011. Nelkin, Dorothy. Dangerous Diagnostics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994. Nelkin, Dorothy. The Political Impact of Technical Expertise. Social Studies of Science 5, no. 1 (1975): 35-54.Nowotny, Helga. Dilemma of Expertise: Democratizing Expertise and Socially Robust Knowledge Science and Public Policy 30, no. 3 (June 2003).Pallagst, Karina. Shrinking Cities in the United States of America: Three Cases, Three Planning Stories. In The Future of Shrinking Cities: Problems, Patterns and Strategies of Urban Transformation in a Global Context, Berkeley, CA, February 2007, by the Center for Global Metropolitan Studies, 81-90. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development and the Shrinking Cities International Research Network, 2009. Popper, Karl R. The Open Society and Its Enemies: The Spell of Plato. Vol. 1. New Jersey: Princeton UP, 1966. Popper, Karl. The Open Society and Its Enemies: The High Tide of Prophecy: Hegel, Marx, and the Aftermath. Vol. 2. New Jersey: Princeton UP, 1966.

Creating an Economic Diversification Trust Fund: Turning Nonrenewable Natural Resources into Sustainable Wealth for West Virginia. West Virginia Center on Budget & Policy. January 2012.Feenberg, Andrew. From Essentialism to Constructivism: Philosophy of Technology at the Crossroads, adapted from Questioning Technology. London: Routledge, 1999, 183 236. Gordon, Tia. NSF Brings More Minorities to Science, Technology, Engineering, and MathematicsSTEM Fields. http://www.ihep.org/press-room/news_release-detail.cfm?id=96 (accessed October 30, 2013)Ravetz, Jerry (Jerome). The Post-normal Sciences of Precaution. Conference on Uncertainty and Precaution in Environmental Management. Water Science & Technology, 52, no. 6 (2005): 11-17.The World Bank, Europe and Central Asia Unit. Monotowns: Paths to Resilience: A Brief Review of International Experiences with Urban Regeneration, 2010.