From politics of technology to the sociology of innovation · 2016-12-27 · Denial of Choice:...
Transcript of From politics of technology to the sociology of innovation · 2016-12-27 · Denial of Choice:...
From politics of technology
to sociotechnical transitions
Celebrating Stewart Russell’s contribution to STIS
Fred Steward,
Edinburgh, 30 March 2012
Stewart Russell
joined the Technology Policy Unit in 1979.
this paper is focused mainly on his theoretical
writings of his time there until1986 – context:
the politics of technology
includes published articles & chapters,
postgraduate theses and conference
presentations
concludes with social shaping of technology
writings from late 1990s – context:
emergence of sociotechnical transitions
Stewart Russell – writings on the political shaping of technology
Autonomy, Determinism, Imperatives: a Review of Thought on the Loss
of Social Control of Technology1980
MSc dissertation, Aston University
Technology: Some myths and some Marxist alternatives
Communist University of London, New Technology Course1981
Risk Assessment as a Political Activity
2nd Conference on Science, Society and Education, Risk and Participation,
Leusden, Netherlands1982
Denial of Choice: Technological Determinism and Its Ideological Role
EASST/STSA Conference, Choice in Science and Technology, London1983
The Social Construction of Artefacts
Social Studies of Science 16(2), May, 331-346 1986
The Political Shaping of Energy Technology
PhD thesis, Aston University 1986
Social Shaping of Technology: Frameworks, Findings & Implications for
Policy
(with R.Williams) in R Williams (ed.), Concepts, Spaces and Tools: Recent
Developments in Social Shaping Research, COST-STY-98-40181983 2000
Personal
1979 - 1986 a period that I shared most
closely with him – personally, intellectually,
and politically
intense and important time for both of us
writings were all produced in specific
moments of this joint experience
our academic institution, an emerging STIS
community and a critical political constituency
Stewart’s style
a meticulous respect for the complexity and
subtlety of the ideas of those that he sought
to criticise
a visceral commitment to ‘modest theory’
extraordinarily cautious about erecting any
new personally branded edifice in academic
or political theory
not due to any anxieties about being criticised
by others – in fact, of course, he relished
such exchanges
To be celebrated
reluctance grounded in a deeper scepticism
of over confident knowledge claims
expressed some traditional academic virtues
to an extreme degree
deserve celebrating in these times of too-
hasty academic self-aggrandisement
a consequence is that much of his creative
commitment has received less visibility than it
merits.
The new politics of technology
Action and knowledge in the 1960s/70s:
The critique of technocratic modernism
1. Authority of expertise
2. Materialistic consumerism
A more democratic mode for using
knowledge in decisions
An interest in alternative technological
choices
Ideas and movements
Environmentalism, feminism, ‘radical science
movement’
Dickson: Alternative technology and the
politics of technological change1974
Elliot, Roy OU Politics of Technology
collection 1976
Endurance of socialism, marxism as the
critical alternative
Stewart’s foundational critiques
Risk assessment
‘transcending the impasse between “facts is
facts” and “anything goes” must relate current
practices to particular conflicts of interest and
power relations’ (1982)
Technological determinism
‘don’t start from technology...any theory
which takes technology as its starting point is
in danger of obscuring the human relations
behind it’ (1980)
Constructing a theory of technological
politics Dissatisfaction with mainstream sociology
and politics
Drawn to marxist approach but critical of the
prevalent technocratic determinism
Interested in plurality and experiment
Ploughed the terrain of organisational theory,
policy studies, political theory and sociology
Political shaping of technology 1986
A unified theory is questionable
theoretical tools for analysing specific
arrangements and outcomes
avoid advocacy of a technical solution
explain existing arrangements &
demonstration of the possibilities of
progressive change
technical arguments – institutional context as
mediated by situated social practice
The general project
how technology is socially shaped
different levels of abstraction
understanding the bulk of accepted
inconspicuous technology, as well as the
dynamics of its more exciting parts (public,
infrastructure
roles of technology as encountered in
individual and collective consumption, in
homes, communities, public services
Conceptual resources & challenges
Interorganisational ‘fields’ (di Maggio)
Routines, practices, contradictions (Benson)
Hegemonic projects (Gramsci)
Organisations, arenas, interactions
Issues, evaluations. Arguments
Connecting levels of analysis
A broadly Marxist approach aiming at a
structured, dynamic and historical account:
Principles and Guidelines for analysing
the political shaping of technology
1986
Process and partially autonomous levels
To view social systems as in a continuous
process of construction, maintenance and
change, even though specific institutions may
be deeply rooted and relatively stable;
To explore the connections between levels of
social structure and areas of activity as parts
of a total social formation, even though each
has partial autonomy;
Specificity and context
To stress the specificity of social
arrangements at all levels;
To explain the similarities and differences in
phenomena by relating the contexts of their
production;
Contradiction & change To acknowledge the presence of contradictions
– the more or less temporary coexistence of
incompatible or inconsistent features of various
types – throughout social systems, within and
between levels of structure and spheres of
activity, and created, recreated, transcended or
exacerbated by action
To view change as produced by these
contradictions, providing incentive, scope and
constraints for action against the existing order;
and to expect that change rather than forming a
smooth process, to be punctuated by crises
Theoretical tools for critical practice
To eschew the notion of a general theory and instead provide the theoretical tools with which specific social arrangements and phenomena can be analysed;
To see theory and praxis as fundamentally and dialectically related, with theory not only informing praxis but arising out of and therefore reflecting practical concerns, mediated through a particular context of social relations in which theorists themselves operate
General analysis of a ‘field’
Identify, locate and characterise the collective actors in the sector, trace the network of relations between them and their connections outside, and situate the sector, all with reference to a general substantive model of the whole social formation;
Trace the historical development of the sector up to and during the period in question, in terms of internal dynamics and effects of change in the wider society.
For a specific interaction Trace the historical trajectory leading the parties to
interaction, consider the interests of the parties as derived from their location and in relation to potential outcomes;
Consider how these interests are represented in objectives and policies, and trace the internal and interorganisational procedures by which they are generated;
Identify the structural elements drawn on by actors in the process of interaction, looking for economic, political and ideological components and considering the different modes of their mobilisation: in devising conscious strategies and tactics, in following accepted procedures, in acting within existing constraints, in attempting to challenge them
For an issue
Trace its origins as the manifestation of a
contradiction, its passage through institutional
arenas, the changing form and content of the
issue as a result of interactions and the
effects of the issue on the terrain.
Two core contributions
Dialectical theory of change
alternative to the rise of the ‘evolutionary’
model of change
Politics of critical practice
alternative to statism/contingency
1999 Synthesis
Social shaping project
Amsterdam workshop – emergence of
sociotechnical transitions
Priority for an inclusive policy relevant
synthesis
Different focus to the focus on differentiation
in the mid 1980s SCOT debate
The new policy agenda
Sociotechnical, situated & systemic character
of technologies
Complexity, contingency and dynamism of
innovation processes
Stability, continuity and patterning
Focus to include appropriation and use
A wider conception of relevant actors and the
terrain of transformation
Attention to culture and knowledge in
technology
Specific tools for challenge led
innovation policy Societal goal led not technology driven
System innovation
Arenas and network building
Backcasting
User led innovation
Provides a core synthesis for an urgent and
uncompleted mission
Retrieving concepts for the current
sociotechnical transitions debate 1
More theoretical diversity needed on the
dynamics of sociotechnical transitions
Dominance of Multilevel Perspective
Overreliance on ‘evolution’ as model of
change
Van de Ven ‘4 motors of change’: evolution,
teleology, lifecycle, dialectics
Retrieving concepts for the current
sociotechnical transitions debate 2
The low profile of politics in the transitions
debate
Inaccurate reflection of founding figures
New voices – Smith, Stirling, Jorgensen
Ideas from Gramscian hegemonic political
theory, an untapped resource