direction, distribution, diversity! pluralising progress in innovation, sustainability and...

Direction, Distribution, Diversity!

pluralising progress in innovation, sustainability and development

Andy StirlingSPRU – science and technology policy research

presentation to seminar atDepartment of Innovation Sciences

Technical University Eindhoven, 15th April, 2010 www.anewmanifesto.org

The Missing Politics of Direction

all technology is good…

all innovation is good…

“For the objectives of the Lisbon Strategy … pro-innovation action [is] a priority.”

- European Parliament

“[we need] more `pro-innovation’ policies …”- EC President, José Manuel Barroso

and determined solely by science…

“[there is] an anti-technology culture …a pro- technology culture must be created…”

- Council for Science and Technology

GM: “… this government's approach is to make decisions … on the basis of sound science

- Tony Blair

Chemicals: “ …sound science will be the basis of the Commission's legislative proposal…”

- EC RTD Commissioner, Philippe Busquin

time

Politics-Denial in Technology Governance

PAST

FUTURE

conventional ‘linear’ understandings of technology change still prevail in mainstream technology governanceeg:

“history is a race to advance technology” - UK Royal Academy of Engineering

‘anti-technology protestors’ are “… members of the 'flat earth society’, opposed to modern economics, modern technology, modern science, modern life itself.” – UN DDG

time


PAST

FUTURE




Treats innovation as homogeneous: no distinctions … no alternatives… no politics … no choice !

time


PAST

FUTURE




Treats innovation as homogeneous: no distinctions … no alternatives … no politics … no choice !

Scope for debate restricted to: yes or no? … how much? how fast?’ … who leads?

time


PAST

FUTURE




Treats innovation as homogeneous: no distinctions … no alternatives … no politics … no choice !

Scope for debate restricted to: yes or no? … how much? how fast?’ … who leads?

Seriously neglects questions over: which way? …what alternatives? says who? …why?

space of technologicalpossibilities

time

Technological Progress as Optimisation

Mainstream policy representations of technology change:

- ‘sound science’ - material constraints, - technical convergence - market equilibrium

yield ‘optimal’ technological / institutional configurations

diversity converges to function-specific optimality

time

Technological Progress as Social Choice

Common picture arising in all studies of technology in society –

– “it’s the other way around!”

multiple diverging directions

time

But: a diversity of processes ‘close down’ possible directions of change

innovation is ‘vector’ not ‘scalar’

Economics and the Normativity of Direction

economics: homeostasis (Sahal, 85) lock-in (Arthur, 89) regimes (Nelson & Winter, 77) trajectories

(Dosi, 82)history: contingency (Mokyr, 92) momentum (Hughes 83) path-dependence (David, 85) path creation (Karnoe, 01)philosophy/politics: autonomy (Winner, 77) closure (Feenberg, 91)

entrapment (Walker, 01) alignment (Geels, 02)social studies: shaping (Bijker, 85) co-construction (Misa, 03)

expectations (Lente, 00) imaginaries (Jasanoff, 05)

QWERTY keyboards

… light water reactors …

… military systems …

Historic ‘Branching Paths’

Many familiar examples of repeated ‘lock-in’ to poor choices

time

particulartrajectories ‘lock in’



Narrow Gauge Railways

… urban transport …

… internal combustion engine …

time




VHS and Betamax

… media standards …

… Windows software…

Deliberately or not – societies choose their technological futures

stakes rise with globalisation, harmonisation, standardisation

time


Contending priorities & plural knowledges yield diverse pathways:

eg: seed production: – ‘GM’: transgenics / syngenics / apomixis;

– marker assisted breeding; – commercial industrial hybrids;

– participatory breeding – public open source research;

time


All are technically feasible and potentially economically viable, but not all fully realisable together, especially in globalised world

Alternative ‘Possible Futures’

Alternative ‘Sustainable Energy Strategies’

Many possible innovation pathways to ‘energy sustainability’:

… which directions will we go?

No shortage of possible innovation paths to energy sustainability:

demand restructuring?

behaviour change?

efficient end use?

service reform?

renewable energy?

carbon capture and storage?

nuclear power?





behaviour change?

efficient end use?

service reform?

renewable energy?


nuclear power?

centralised resources?

transport fuels?

low temperature heat?

distributed generation?





behaviour change?

efficient end use?

service reform?

renewable energy?


nuclear power?

centralised resources?

transport fuels?

low temperature heat?

distributed generation?

small hydro?

osmotic gradient?

offshore wave?

subsea wave?

onshore wave?

tidal stream?

onshore wind?

offshore wind?

high altitude kites?

roof-integrated PV?

biomass CHP?

municipal waste CHP?

geothermal CHP?



The Missing Politics of Choice

“…We have no alternative to nuclear power …

… if there were other sources of low carbon energy I would be in favour, but there aren‘t”

Independent, 2006

eg: Sir David King, former UK Chief Scientist

“…We need to do everything… we cannot afford not to use nuclear power.” BBC Radio 4, 2007

eg: David MacKay, DECC chief scientist

‘Britain must go nuclear’…“If the aim is to get off fossil fuels, we need nuclear power or solar power generated in other countries’ deserts, or both.”

Independent, 2009

The Politics of Expectation

1: assume future electricity infrastructures shift towards

distributed, low-voltage, smart-metered electricity systems,

subject to intelligent control and flexible supply contracts

Directions for technology change are driven by expectations

invest in small scale renewables and energy service innovations

2: assume persistence of traditional large centralised steam-cycle

power stations, presiding over high-voltage transmission systems,

with one-way distribution and conventional tariffs

incremental innovation along traditional fossil and nuclear paths

Determinist ‘sound science’ / ‘pro innovation’ language

not innocent … but moulds choices and closes politics

The Complicity of Innovation Studies

despite seminal role in substantiating mechanisms of closure, conventional innovation studies close down expectations over general dynamics (as well as particular outcomes) of progress

focus is on fostering:

- performance (Dayananda 07) - cost/benefit (Layard, Glaister 94)

- rate of innovation (Chakravorti 01) - efficiency (Grupp 97)

- innovation systems (Fagerberg 06) - first movers (Lieberman 88)

- catching up (Santangelo 06) - forging ahead (Abramowitz 86)

- diffusion (Rogers 03) - leapfrogging (Brezis 93)

- advance (Nelson 02) - agency (Rosenberg 02)

or avoiding:

- barriers (Parente 94) - falling behind (Abramowitz 86)

- laggards (Aghion 06) - stranding (Farrell 86)

innovation thus tends to be addressed falsely as scalar quantity, rather than vector quality – ie: without the property of direction

Directions for ‘Development Transitions’

Historically, even ‘transitions’ analysis neglects questions of ‘direction’

Key focus: enabling chosen technology to move from niche to regime.

Policy challenge seen more as instrumental ‘management’ under self-evident goals, than of politics over the normative priorities themselves.

Recent critiques highlight importance of political questions over ‘direction’

(eg: Smith et al, 2005; Shove and Walker, 2007).

Nowhere is this more salient than in case of the poorest countries

- 30% of global public research is on the military

- only 10% of world health research on diseases that affect 90%

- renewable energy receives only small fraction of nuclear research

Questions of direction are crucial for future development transitions

Distributed Innovation for Development

Where transitions are driven by the interests of marginalised people, attention is especially important to potential for distributed innovation

Examples of transformative distributed innovation for development:

- malaria bednets and vaccination programmes in Africa;

- slum-dwellers securing water supplies in Latin America;

- participatory rice breeding in Southeast Asia;

- health practitioners combine local and biomedical methods in Africa;

- ‘bottom of the pyramid’ markets in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Organised social movements can play an especially important role

- European nuclear activists: windpower, green housing, fuel poverty;

- S. African HIV activists: affordable medicines and healthcare;

- Indian ‘Honey Bee Network’ of grassroots entrepreneurs:

palm tree climbing; bicycle-powered washing; open source IP-sharing.

Blind spot in social and political science of innovation (Smith, 05)

- political science: ‘systems of production’, but not innovation (Hollingsworth 97)

- social movements research: ideas, institutions, interests – not technology (Smith, 05)

- social studies of technology: only general ‘pressure’ (Poel, 00; Jamison, 99)

- multi-level model acknowledges role … (Schot, 03; Geels, 08)

…but pays insufficient attention to role of politics and power (Smith et al, 05)

But innovation studies neglects civil society…

Restricted focus in innovation systems research

- explicitly excluded in ‘triple helix’ (government, industry, academia) (Etzkowitz 05)

- sidelined as general factor in healthy economy (Fukuyama 00)

- relevant only at lower levels of regional systems of innovation (Cook 98)

- implicated indirectly thro’ small business ‘partnerships’ in development (Hall 01)

- on ‘democracy’: focus is on education system, not civil society (Lundvall 09)

T im eT im e

L a n d sc a p e d e v e lo p m e n ts p u t p re s su re o n e x is tin g re g im e , w h ic h o p e n s u p , c re a tin g w in d o w s o f o p p o rtu n ity fo r n o v e lt ie s

S o c io - te c h n ic a l re g im e is ‘d y n a m ic a lly s ta b le ’.O n d iffe re n t d im e n s io n s th e re a re o n g o in g p ro c e ss e s

N e w c o n f ig u ra tio n b re a k s th ro u g h , ta k in ga d v a n ta g e o f ‘w in d o w s o f o p p o rtu n ity ’ . A d ju s tm e n ts o c c u r in s o c io - te c h n ic a l re g im e .

E le m e n ts a re g ra d u a lly l in k e d to g e th e r,a n d s ta b ilis e in a d o m in a n t d e s ig n .In te rn a l m o m e n tu m in c re a se s .

L e a rn in g p ro c e s se s ta k e p la c e o n m u ltip le d im e n s io n s .D iffe re n t e le m e n ts a re g ra d u a lly l in k e d to g e th e r in a se a m le s s w e b .

N e w s o c io - te c h n ic a lre g im e in f lu e n c e s la n d s c a p e

Techno log ica ln ich es

Soc io -techn ica l’land scape

Soc io -tech n ica lreg im e

Te c h n o lo g y

M a rk e ts , u se r p re fe re n c e s

C u ltu reP o lic y

S c ie n c eIn d u s try

…tho’ civil society doesn’t neglect innovation!

T im eT im e










Te c h n o lo g y


C u ltu reP o lic y


saturation / incumbent inertia

SOCIO-TECHNICAL

REGIME

…but civil society doesn’t neglect technology!

after Geels, 2002

T im eT im e










Te c h n o lo g y


C u ltu reP o lic y



experimentation / learning

alignment / stabilisation / momentum

TECHNOLOGICAL NICHESTECHNOLOGICAL

NICHES

SOCIO-TECHNICAL

REGIME


after Geels, 2002

T im eT im e










Te c h n o lo g y


C u ltu reP o lic y





environmental drivers / political pressuresenvironmental drivers /

political pressures


NICHES

SOCIO-TECHNICAL

REGIME

SOCIO-TECHNICAL LANDSCAPE


after Geels, 2002

T im eT im e










Te c h n o lo g y


C u ltu reP o lic y




saturation / incumbent inertia windows of opportunity / breakthrough / reconfiguration


political pressures


NICHES

SOCIO-TECHNICAL

REGIME



after Geels, 2002

T im eT im e










Te c h n o lo g y


C u ltu reP o lic y






political pressures


NICHES

SOCIO-TECHNICAL

REGIME


new regime affectslandscape


after Geels, 2002

after Smith, 2006eg: renewables / nuclear; green / chlorine chemicals; ecological / GM agricultureElements of ‘political judo’ (Parmentier in UN, 2002)

T im eT im e










Te c h n o lo g y


C u ltu reP o lic y


international trade regulation




environmental drivers / political pressures

environmental drivers / political pressures


NICHES

SOCIO-TECHNICAL

REGIME


- activist visions - DIY inventors- grassroots innovation - early adopters

- community mobilisation- green consumption

- consumer boycotts - protest and lobbying- counter-expertise

- policy shift - mass markets- behaviour change - training demand

- movement building - political climate- awareness raising - culture change

- institutional structure- trade patterns


‘lock-in’ to innovation trajectories favoured by

incumbent interests

multiple practices, and processes, for informing social agency (emergent and unstructured as well as deliberately designed )

complex, dynamic, inter-coupled and mutually-reinforcing eco-socio-

technical configurations

narrow scope of attention

Conventional Policy Dynamics

SOCIAL APPRAISAL

GOVERNANCE COMMITMENTS

‘closed down’ discourse

POSSIBLE PATHWAYS

unitary ‘sound scientific’ ‘evidence based’, expert

prescriptions

citizen ‘verdicts’ / deliberative consensus

single ‘best / optimal / most legitimate’

decisions

risk / cost-benefit analysis

disciplinary deliberation

restricted view of options, knowledges, uncertainties

Sustainability

$IIIIII

interest-funded science, excluded civil society

POSSIBLE PATHWAYSMULTIPLE

TRAJECTORIES

SOCIAL APPRAISAL

GOVERNANCE COMMITMENTS

broad-based appraisal distributed innovation civil society engagement

‘opening up’ with ‘plural conditional’

policy discourse

multivalent dynamics in diverse socio-technical

trajectories

‘best path’ depends on: contexts, perspectives, places,

sensitivities, scenarios, equilibria, pathways, discourses

multiple: institutions, disciplines, methods, issues, options, frames, uncertainties, contexts, properties, perspectives

Plural Roles for Diversity

Sustainability

www.anewmanifesto.org

Our vision is a world where science and technology work more directly for social justice, poverty alleviation and the environment.

This requires innovation which is transformative – reshaping social and power relations to allow innovation in new directions.

It means challenging the dominance of pathways driven simply by private profit and military interests.

It means innovation for sustainability, paying attention to ecological integrity and diverse environmental and social values.

It means that the benefits of innovation are widely and equitably shared, and not captured by narrow, powerful interests.

It means encouraging open and plural forms of innovation pathway – social and technical; high tech and low tech; those which are currently hidden, as well as those which are more commonly recognised.

It means organising innovation in ways that are networked, distributed and inclusive, involving diverse people and groups, including those who are poor and marginalised.

It means going beyond technical elites in large international, state and commercial organisations to support and harness the energy, creativity and ingenuity of users, workers, consumers, citizens, activists, farmers and small businesses.

direction, distribution, diversity! pluralising progress in innovation, sustainability and...

Education