Abstract
The paper summarizes the current state of the “Openness Paradigm” for development, with a focus on open source hardware and the related issues of open science, open data, and open access. It focuses on how such efforts support more equal collaborations between North and South on open science and citizen projects. It also discusses these efforts as an example of an inclusive Research and Development (R&D) agenda different from the traditional practice of technology transfer, which enforces the hierarchical notion of “development.” We apply the present postcolonial studies discourse along with contemporary discussions in the west on public participation in science, as a framework to discuss Technology for Development (Tech4Dev). Thus, bringing attention to nontraditional formats and institutions, and new institution–community relations, as examples of a more democratic and inclusive Tech4Dev agenda.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This pattern unfortunately is hard to expel, and can be seen reproduced across class, race, within a country.
- 2.
This transfer takes the form of collaborations, educational and empowerment programs, and material donations, but also conveniently as a new market for the technological innovations and solutions made by the Global North for the South.
- 3.
We do not intend to claim that Spivak’s issue with the impossibility of the subaltern speech (and research) can be resolved. Despite this framework, we do believe there is value in the attempts to try and often fail in such efforts, for the sake of experiencing the paradoxes and opening the debate of what can be done further.
- 4.
Polymerase chain reaction (PCR), especially the quantitative PCR, now on kick-starter, is useful for genetic engineering, diagnostics, DNA fingerprinting, etc.
- 5.
OSHW states “Open source hardware gives people the freedom to control their technology while sharing knowledge and encouraging commerce through the open exchange of designs.”
References
Adas, M. (1989). Machines as the measure of man (pp. 292–318). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Alberts, B., et al. (2014). Rescuing US biomedical research from its systemic flaws. In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. http://www.pnas.org/content/111/16/5773. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
Arofatullah N. A., et al. (2014a). Open hardware webcam microscope and its impact on citizen science Jogja River Project. In Abstracts of 2014 EPFL-UNESCO Conference on Technologies for Development. http://cooperation.epfl.ch/2014Tech4Dev. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
Arofatullah, N. A., Widianto, D., & Prijambada, I. D. (2014b). Intersection of DIY (do it yourself) and DIWO (do it with others). Approaches in sharing microbiology know-how to benefit communities. In Abstracts of 2014 EPFL-UNESCO Conference on Technologies for Development. http://cooperation.epfl.ch/2014Tech4Dev. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
Banuri, T. (1990). Modernization and its discontents: A cultural perspective on theories of development. In F. Apffel Marglin, & S. A. Marglin (Eds.), Dominating knowledge: Development, culture, and resistance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198286943.001.0001/acprof-9780198286943-chapter-3. Accessed 30 Nov 2014.
BBSRC Media (n.d.). E. coli 0104:H4 outbreak genome: fighting disease outbreaks with “the tweenome”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttMnQIE-P-s&feature=youtu.be. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
Brossard, D., Lewenstein, B., & Bonney, R. (2005). Scientific knowledge and attitude change: The impact of a citizen science project. International Journal of Science Education, 27(9), 1099–1121.
Byerlee, D., & Fischer, K. (2002). Accessing modern science: policy and institutional options for agricultural biotechnology in developing countries. World Development, 30(6), 931–948.
Cohn, J. P. (2008). Citizen science: Can volunteers do real research? BioScience, 58(3), 192–197
Conrad, C. C., & Hilchey, K. G. (2011). A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 176(1–4), 273–291.
Cooper, C. B. (2012). Links and distinctions among citizenship, science, and citizen science. A response to the future of citizen science. Democracy and Education, 20(2), Article 13.
Cooper, C.B., Dickinson, J., Phillips, T., & Bonney, R. (2007). Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems.” Ecology and Society, 12(2).
Dickinson, J. L., Zuckerberg, B., & Bonter, D. N. (2010). Citizen science as an ecological research tool: Challenges and benefits. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics, 41, 49–72.
Edmunds, S., et al. (2014). GigaScience: Open publishing for the big data era. In Abstracts of 2014 EPFL-UNESCO Conference on Technologies for Development. http://cooperation.epfl.ch/2014Tech4Dev. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
Ettinger, K. M. (2015). Open issues and a proposal for open-source data monitoring to assure quality, reliability, and safety in health care devices targeting low- and middle-income countries. In S. Hostettler, E. Hazboun & J.-C. Bolay (Eds.), Technologies for development: What is essential? Paris, Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht, London: Springer.
Forero-Pineda, C. (2006). The impact of stronger intellectual property rights on science and technology in developing countries. Research Policy, 35(6), 808–824.
Freeman, C., & Perez, C. (1988). Structural crisis of adjustment, business cycles and investment behavior. In Dosi et al. (Eds.), Technical change and economic theory (pp. 38–66). London: Frances Pinter.
Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks. International Publishers Co., ISBN 0-7178-0397-X.
Guédon, J.-C. (2008). Open access and the divide between “mainstream” and “peripheral” science. http://eprints.rclis.org/10778/1/Brazil-final.pdf. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
Holmgren, M., & Schnitzer, S. A. (2004). Science on the rise in developing countries. PLoS Biology, 2(1), e1. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0020001.
Kera, D. (2012). Hackerspaces and DIYbio in Asia: Connecting science and community with open data, kits and protocols. Journal of Peer Production. http://peerproduction.net/issues/issue-2/peer-reviewed-papers/diybio-in-asia/. Accessed 30 Nov 2014.
Kera, D. (2014). Innovation regimes based on collaborative and global tinkering: Synthetic biology and nanotechnology in the hackerspaces. Technology in Society, 37, 28–37. doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2013.07.004.
Levine, G. (2014). Open source hardware biomimetic snake robot as a toolkit for monitoring and exploring marine environments. In Abstracts of 2014 EPFL-UNESCO Conference on Technologies for Development. http://cooperation.epfl.ch/2014Tech4Dev. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
Li, Z., et al. (2014). The 3,000 rice genomes project. GigaScience, 3(7). doi:10.1186/2047-217X-3-7.
MacLean, D. et al. (2013). Crowdsourcing genomic analyses of ash and ash dieback power to the people. GigaScience, 2(2). doi:10.1186/2047-217X-2-2.
McDevitt, V. L. (2014). More than money: the exponential impact of academic technology transfer. Technology and Innovation, 16, 75–84. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3727/194982414X13971392823479
O’Brien, S. J. (2012). Genome empowerment for the Puerto Rican parrot—Amazona vittata. GigaScience, 1(13). doi:10.1186/2047-217X-1-13.
OSHW_a (n.d.). Definition (English). http://www.oshwa.org/definition/. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
OSHW_b (n.d.). Bio-fertilizers deriving from UGM research. http://www.gamaagri.com/. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
Rata, E. (2011). A Critical Inquiry into indigenous knowledge claims. Presentation to the Department of Education, University of Cambridge. https://www.educ.cam.ac.uk/research/academicgroups/equality/Rata2-4.pdf. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
Said, E. (1978). Orientalism (pp. 1–28). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd.
Sambuli, N., et al. (2013). Viability, verification, validity: 3Vs of crowdsourcing. iHub Research. http://www.ihub.co.ke/ihubresearch/jb_VsReportpdf2013-8-29-07-38-56.pdf. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
Sambuli, N., et al. (2014). Crowdsourcing citizen-generated data for open science: A case study from the 2013 Kenya general elections. In Abstracts of 2014 EPFL-UNESCO Conference on Technologies for Development. http://cooperation.epfl.ch/2014Tech4Dev. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
SciDev.Net (2014a). Are robotic snakes “essential” for development? http://www.scidev.net/global/technology/scidev-net-at-large/are-robotic-snakes-essential-for-development.html. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
SciDev.Net (2014b). Hackers aim to reboot development with DIY mentality. http://www.scidev.net/global/innovation/news/hackers-aim-to-reboot-development-with-diy-mentality.html. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
Singh, R., Gupta, V., & Mondal, A. (2012). Jugaad—from “making do” and “quick fix” to an innovative, sustainable and low-cost survival strategy at the bottom of the pyramid. International Journal of Rural Management, 8(1–2), 87–105. doi:10.1177/0973005212461995.
Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the subaltern speak? In C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 271–313). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Strover, S. (2003). Remapping the digital divide. The Information Society: An International Journal, 19(4), 275–277.
Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Young, J. R. (2001). Does ‘digital divide’ rhetoric do more harm than good? Chronicle of Higher Education. http://chronicle.com/article/Does-Digital-Divide-/3058. Accessed 29 Nov 2014.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hirosue, S., Kera, D., Huang, H. (2015). Promises and Perils of Open Source Technologies for Development: Can the “Subaltern” Research and Innovate?. In: Hostettler, S., Hazboun, E., Bolay, JC. (eds) Technologies for Development. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16247-8_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16247-8_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16246-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16247-8
eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)