Cultural Aspects of Innovation, including ”grass-roots” innovations

Andrew JamisonAalborg University

NACI Workshop on Broad-based Innovations, Pretoria, South Africa, Feb 27, 2009

Based on:

By way of introduction...

A good technology, firmly related to human needs,

cannot be one that has a maximum productivity as its

supreme goal: it must rather, as in an organic system,

seek to provide the right quantity of the right quality at

the right time and the right place for the right purpose.

Lewis Mumford, 1961

The Cultures of Innovation

culture economic,commercial

bureaucratic, professional

civic, ”grass-roots”

relevant contexts

companies,business networks,markets

governments,nation-states, societies

movements,communities,regions

policyaims

entrepreneurship,competitiveness

construction, coordination

appropriation,cooperation

policyorientation

market-oriented expert-oriented change-oriented

Changing Modes of Knowledge Production

Industrial Military Commercial “Little Science” “Big Science” “Technoscience”

Mode 1 Mode 1½ Mode 2 Before WWII 1940s-1970s 1980s-

Form of Knowledge disciplinary multidisciplinary transdisciplinary

Organiza- individuals and R&D departments ad hoc projects andtional form research groups and institutes networks

Dominantvalues academic bureaucratic entrepreneurial

From Little Science to Big Science

change in size and scale

mission orientation, external control

university-government collaboration

bureaucratic norm, or value system

new role for the state: ”science policy”

appropriate technology/technology assessment

Critiques of Big Science in the 1960s

moral, or spiritual (e.g. Martin Luther King) against injustice,”poverty of the spirit” for a new morality

scientific, or ecological (e.g. Rachel Carson) against reductionism, ”the abuse of the planet” for an environmental science

humanist, or cultural (e.g. Lewis Mumford)against hubris, ”the myth of the machine” for an appropriate technology

Tvindmøllen 1977-1978

Nordic Folkcenter for Renewable Energy

An Appropriate TechnologyMovement in the 1970s

The New Alchemy Institute Ark

From Big Science to Technoscience

change in range and scope

market orientation, corporate control

university-industry collaboration

entrepreneurial norm, or value system

the state as strategist: innovation policy

from assessment to promotion: ”foresight”

The Age of Technoscience

A blurring of discursive boundaries between science (episteme) and technology (techne)

A trespassing of institutional borders between public and private, economic and academic

A mixing of skills and competencies across disciplines and societal domains

Contending Policy Strategies

The dominant , or hegemonic strategy (mode 2):

commercialization, entrepreneurship, transdisciplinarity

The residual, or traditionalist strategy (mode 1):

academicization, expertise, (multi)disciplinarity

An emerging, or sustainable strategy (mode 3):

appropriation, empowerment, interdisciplinarity

Transdisciplinarity, or ”mode 2”

”Knowledge which emerges from a particular

context of application with its own distinct

theoretical structures, research methods and

modes of practice but which may not be locatable

on the prevailing disciplinary map.”

Michael Gibbons et al, The New Production of Knowledge (1994)

The Tendency to Hubris

transgressing established forms of quality control ”a drift of epistemic criteria” (Elzinga)

transcending human limitations ”converging technologies” (bio, info, cogno, nano)

neglecting public participation and assessment lack of accountability and precaution

overemphasis on entrepreneurship propagation of competition rather than cooperation

The Forces of Habit(us)

Technoscience primarily seen as providing new opportunities for scientists and engineers

Taught by restructuring established scientific and engineering fields: multi- or ”subdisciplinarity”

Politics and the rest of society left largely outside of research and education: ”outsourcing” of ethics

A continuing belief in separating experts and their

knowledge from contexts of use

“A discipline is defined by possession of a collective capital

of specialized methods and concepts, mastery of which is

the tacit or implicit price of entry to the field. It produces a

‘historical transcendental,’ the disciplinary habitus, a

system of schemes of perception and appreciation (where

the incorporated discipline acts as a censorship).”

Pierre Bourdieu, Science of Science and Reflexivity (2004)

The Discipline as Habit(us)

The Need for a ”Mode 3”

At the discursive, or macro level Sustainable innovation, connecting technological

solutions to social and environmental problems

At the institutional, or meso level Responsible innovation, creating accountability

procedures for science and engineering

At the personal, or micro level Community-oriented innovation, fostering innovation

processes at the ”grass-roots”

A Hybrid Imagination

At the macro, or discursive level connecting innovation cultures, integrating ideas

At the meso, or institutional level making spaces for collective creativity

At the micro, or personal level combining identities and forms of competence

For example: Vandana Shiva

Vandana Shiva and Carlo Petrini at a Slow Food Cafe

The conflict over genetically engineered crops and

foods is not a conflict between ”culture” and

”science”. It is between two cultures of science:

one based on transparency, public accountability,

and responsibility toward the environment and

people and another based on profits and the lack

of transparency, accountability, and responsibility.

Stolen Harvest, 2000

Vandana Shiva on GMOs

For example:Fritjof Capra

• physicist-turned-environmentalist• author of many popular books• founder of Center for Ecoliteracy

“Since the outstanding

characteristic of the biosphere is

its inherent ability to sustain life,

a sustainable human community

must be designed in such a

manner that its technologies and

social institutions honor,

support, and cooperate with

nature's inherent ability to

sustain life.”

The Centre for Science and

Environment (CSE) is a public

interest research and advocacy

organisation based in New Delhi.

CSE researches into, lobbies for

and communicates the urgency of

development that is both

sustainable and equitable.

Anil Agarwal, the founder of CSE, shown at work with one of the six State

of India’s Environment reports that the centre has put out since the

1980s.

For example:

…and, not to forget, the new president!

Raising money through the Internet

Mixing old and new forms of communication

Applying techniques of social networking

Connecting people and cultures virtually

In short, making appropriate use of technology

In conclusion...

To counteract the dominance of the commercial

culture, we need policies that explicitly support:

the civic, ”not-for-profit” culture of innovation,

interdisciplinary educational programs,

mixing expertise and social responsibility,

creating sites for collective learning,

in short, fostering a hybrid imagination!