Cultural Aspects of Innovation, including ”grass-roots” innovations NACI Workshop on Broad-based Innovations, Pretoria, South Africa, Feb 27, 2009 Cultural Aspects of Innovation, including ”grass-roots” innovations Andrew Jamison Aalborg University 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 economic, commercial bureaucratic, professional civic, ”grass-roots” relevant contexts companies, business networks, markets governments, nation-states, societies movements, communities, regions policy aims entrepreneurship, competitiveness construction, coordination appropriation,cooperation orientation 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 and tional form research groups and institutes networks Dominant values 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

An Appropriate Technology Movement in the 1970s The New Alchemy Institute Ark Tvindmøllen 1977-1978 Nordic Folkcenter for Renewable Energy

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

The Discipline as Habit(us) “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 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

Vandana Shiva on GMOs 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

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.”

For example: 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.

…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!