Ciencia y tecnología más allá del crecimiento

  1. Pansera, Mario 1
  2. Lloveras, Javier 1
  1. 1 Universidade de Vigo
    info

    Universidade de Vigo

    Vigo, España

    ROR https://ror.org/05rdf8595

Journal:
CREA International Multidisciplinary Journal

ISSN: 2660-8901

Year of publication: 2023

Volume: 3

Issue: 1

Pages: 24-32

Type: Article

DOI: 10.35869/IJMC.V3I1.4868 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: CREA International Multidisciplinary Journal

Abstract

Growth advocates usually resort to science, technology and, above all, to innovation to claim that endless economic growth is not only needed and desirable but also materially feasible. Science is often invoked as the source of a progress which, through the salvific role of technology, has the potential to stretch planetary limits and avoid environmental disaster. According to Science and Technology and Society (STS) scholars, science and technology are, however, socially constructed in a way that reflects the dominant values and worldviews of the context in which they emerge. In this article, we argue that present modes of science and technology development are built on the questionable assumption that economic growth is always good and desirable. In order to imagine a post-growth world, we also need to re-imagine the role of science and technology in society.

Bibliographic References

  • Arrow, K. J. (1962). The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing. The Review of Economic Studies, 29, 155–173.
  • Bessant, J., Lamming, R., Noke, H., & Phillips, W. (2005). Managing innovation beyond the steady state. Technovation, 25(12), 1366–1376.
  • Bonaiuti, M. (2014). The great transition. Routledge.
  • Bookchin, M. (2004). Post-scarcity anarchism. AK press.
  • Bussu, S., Davis, H. and Pollard, A. (Ed.). (2014). The best of Sciencewise reflections on public dialogue. Sciencewise Byrd.
  • Callon, M. (1991). Techno-Economic Networks and Irreversibility. In J. Law (Ed.), A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination (pp. 132–161). Routledge.
  • Carson, R. (1962). Silent spring. Penguin Classics.
  • Cozzens, S., & Kaplinsky, R. (2009). Innovation, poverty and inequality: cause, coincidence, or co-evolution? In B.-A. Lundvall (Ed.), Handbook of Innovation System and Developing Countries(pp. 57–82). Edward Elgar.
  • Cozzens, S., & Thakur, D. (Eds) (2014). Innovation and Inequality: Emerging Technologies in an Unequal World(ed). Edward Elgar.
  • De Saille, S. & Medvecky, F. (2016). Innovation for a steady statea case for responsible stagnation Innovation for a steady state: a case for responsible stagnation. Economy and Society, 45, 1–23.
  • Eekels, J. (1984). Innovate or perish: A cautionary tale. Technovation, 2(3), 149–167.
  • Ellul, J. (1964). The Technological Society. Penguin Vintage.
  • Escobar, A. (2004). Beyond the Third World: imperial globality, global coloniality and anti-globalisation social movements. Third World Quarterly, 25(1), 207–230.
  • Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. C., & Verspagen, B. (2009). The evolution of Norway’s national innovation system. Science and Public Policy, 36(6), 431–444.
  • Flyvbjerg, B. (2004). Phronetic planning research: theoretical and methodological reflections. Planning Theory & Practice, 5(3), 283–306.
  • Freeman, C., & Soete, L. (1997). The economics of industrial innovation. Pinter.
  • Gorz, A. (1980). Ecology as Politics. South End Press.
  • Graeber, D. (2012). Of Flying Cars and the Declining Rate of Profit. The Baffler No 19. Retrieved from https://thebaffler.com/salvos/of-flying-cars-and-the-declining-rate-of-profit
  • Illich, I. (1973). Tools for conviviality.Harper & Row.
  • Jünger, F. G. (1949). The Failure of Technology: Perfection Without Purpose. Washington, D.C: Henry Regnery Company.
  • Leach, M., Rockström, J., Raskin, P., Scoones, I., Stirling, A., Smith, A., Thompson, J., Millstone, E., Ely, A., Arond, E., & Carl Folke, P. O. (2012). Transforming innovation for sustainability. Ecology and Society,17(2).
  • Leydesdorff, L., & Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The Triple Helix as a model for innovation studies. Science and Public Policy, 25, 195–203.
  • Lucas, R. E. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22, 3–42.
  • Lundvall, B. (2010). National systems of innovations. Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Anthem Press.
  • Maynard-Atem, L. (2018). Innovate OR Die. Impact, 2018(1), 13–15.
  • Meadows, D., Meadows, D., Randers, J., & Behrens, W. (1972). The Limits to Growth: A Report to The Club of Rome. Universe Books.
  • OECD. (2015). The Innovation Imperative Contributing to Productivity, Growth and Well-Being. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/innovation/the-innovation-imperative-9789264239814-en.htm
  • Pansera, M., & Fressoli, M. (2021). Innovation without growth: Frameworks for understanding technological change in a post-growth era. Organization, 28(3), 380–404.
  • Pansera, M., & Owen, R. (2018). Framing inclusive innovation within the discourse of development: Insights from case studies in India. Research Policy, 47, 23–34.
  • Pansera, Mario, and Richard Owen. 2018. Innovation for De-Growth: A Case Study of Counter-Hegemonic Practices from Kerala, India. Journal of Cleaner Production197(2): 1872–83.
  • Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-first Century. Harvard University Press.
  • Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1984). The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology might Benefit Each Other. In Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E (Eds.).Social Studies of Science(pp. 399–441).
  • Polanyi, K. (2001). The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time. Beacon Press.
  • Rist, G. (2011). The history of development: from western origins to global faith. Zed Books.
  • Romer, P. M. (1994). The Origins of Endogenous Growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8, 3–22.
  • Russell, A. L., & Vinsel, L. (2018). After innovation, turn to maintenance. Technology and Culture, 59(1), 1-25.
  • Russell, B. (2004). In praise of idleness and other essays. Psychology Press.
  • Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is Beautiful. Harper & Row.
  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Transaction Publishers.
  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1994). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Routledge.
  • Solow, R. M. (1957). Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 39, 312–320.
  • Solow, R. M. (2002). Interview with Robert Solow. The Region. Retrieved from http://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications_papers/pub_display.cfm?id=3399&TC=1
  • Stirling, A. (2008). “Opening up” and “closing down” power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 33, 262–294.
  • Stirling, A. (2015). Towards innovation democracy? Participation, responsibility and precaution in the politics of science and technology. In STEPS Working Paper 78. STEPS Centre Brighton.
  • Strand, R., Saltelli, A., Giampietro, M., Rommetveit, K., & Funtowicz, S. (2018). New narratives for innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197, 1849–1853.
  • Tidd, J., & Bessant, J. R. (2009). Managing innovation: integrating technological, market and organizational change(4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons Inc.
  • Verspagen, B. (1992). Endogenous innovation in neoclassical growth models: A survey. Journal of Macroeconomics,14, 631–662.
  • Victor, P. A. (2008). Managing Without Growth: Slower by Design, Not Disaster. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Winner, L. (1980). Do Artefacts Have Politics? Daedalus, 109(1), 121–136.
  • Zoellick, J. C., & Bisht, A. (2018). It’s not (all) about efficiency: Powering and organizing technology from a degrowth perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197, 1787–1799
Data source: Dialnet