Advertisement

Introduction

  • Logan D. A. WilliamsEmail author
Chapter
  • 86 Downloads

Abstract

Millions of people become blind due to cataracts and other avoidable or preventable eye diseases. South Asia has multiple sites of global health innovation addressing this problem. Science and technology studies scholars, business scholars, evolutionary economists, and the government of the Netherlands use the multi-level perspective in transition studies to think through socio-technical change. The limitations of the multi-level perspective for understanding socio-technical change in the global south are evaluated, and the historical origins and current understanding of technology transfer, modern development, and appropriate technology in the global south are conveyed. This global ethnography of community ophthalmology organizations reveals that the multi-level perspective cannot be used to explain endogenous development in the global south, without the new theoretical framework of dual socio-technical regimes. Chapters 2–8 are summarized.

Keywords

Socio-technical Regime Multi-level Perspective Global South Community Ophthalmology Sociotechnical Change 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Anderson, Warwick. 2002. “Introduction—Postcolonial Technoscience.” Social Studies of Science 32 (5–6): 643–58.Google Scholar
  2. Anonymous. 2010. “APACRS Eye World Asia-Pacific Meeting Reporter: Reporting Live From the 25th APAO Congress Bejing, September 16–20, 2010.” Eye World Magazine, September 20. Retrieved August 21, 2011. http://www.apacrs.org/edm/APAO/mr/web_09202010.htm.
  3. Arnold, David. 2005. “Europe, Technology, and Colonialism in the 20th Century.” History and Technology: An International Journal 21 (1): 85–106.Google Scholar
  4. Basalla, George. 1967. “The Spread of Western Science.” Science 156: 611–22.Google Scholar
  5. Bath, Patricia Era. 1976. “Rationale for a Program in Community Ophthalmology.” Paper Presented at the American Public Health Association, Miami, FL.Google Scholar
  6. ———. 1978. “Blindness Prevention Through Programs of Community Ophthalmology in Developing Countries.” XXIII Concilium Ophthalmologicum, Kyoto, International Congress Series No. 450, 2 (May): 1913–15.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 1979. “Rationale for a Program in Community Ophthalmology.” Journal of the National Medical Association 71: 145.Google Scholar
  8. Birtchnell, Thomas. 2009. “From ‘Hindolence’ to ‘Spirinomics’: Discourse, Practice and the Myth of Indian Enterprise.” South Asia-Journal of South Asian Studies 32 (2): 248–68.Google Scholar
  9. ———. 2011. “Jugaad as Systemic Risk and Disruptive Innovation in India.” Contemporary South Asia 19 (4): 357–72.Google Scholar
  10. ———. 2013. “Pyramid or Iceberg? Problematizing the Fortune to Be Made from India’s Austerity.” Marketing Theory 13 (3): 389–92.Google Scholar
  11. Burawoy, Michael. 1998. “The Extended Case Method.” Sociological Theory 16: 4–33.Google Scholar
  12. ———. 2000. “Introduction: Reaching for the Global.” In Global Ethnography: Forces, Connections, and Imaginations in a Postmodern World, edited by Michael Burawoy, Joseph A. Blum, Sheba George, Zsuzsa Gille, Millie Thayer, Teresa Gowan, Lynne Haney, Maren Klawiter, Steve H. Lopez, and Sean Riain, 1st ed., 1–40. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  13. Callon, Michel. 1984. “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay.” The Sociological Review 32 (1_suppl): 196–233.Google Scholar
  14. Chakrabarty, Dipesh. 1995. “Postcoloniality and the Artifice of History.” In The Post-colonial Studies Reader, edited by Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths, and Helen Tiffin, 383–90. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Cherlet, Jan. 2014. “Epistemic and Technological Determinism in Development Aid.” Science Technology Human Values 39 (6): 773–94.Google Scholar
  16. Chorev, Nitsan. 2012. The World Health Organization Between North and South. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Data Monitor. 2008. “Alcon, Inc. SWOT Analysis.” Company Report DUNS Number: 086022753. Data Monitor. EBSCOhost. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=33082004&site=ehost-live.
  18. De Castro, Leonardo D. 1997. “Transporting Values by Technology Transfer.” Bioethics 11 (3–4): 193–205.Google Scholar
  19. Deshpande, Vijaya. 2000. “Ophthalmic Surgery: A Chapter in the History of Sino-Indian Medical Contacts.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 63 (3): 370–88.Google Scholar
  20. Elliot, Robert H. 1917. The Indian Operation of Couching for Cataract. London, UK: H. K. Lewis and Co. Ltd. The Foundation of the American Academy of Ophthalmology Museum of Vision & Ophthalmic Heritage. San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  21. Ely, Adrian, and Martin Bell. 2009. “The Original “Sussex Manifesto”: Its Past and Future Relevance.” STEPS Working Paper 27, STEPS Centre, Brighton. http://steps-centre.org/wp-content/uploads/ely-and-bell-paper-27.pdf.
  22. Englander, Karen. 2014. “The Rise of English as the Language of Science.” In Writing and Publishing Science Research Papers in English, edited by Karen Englander, 3–4. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978–94-007-7714-9_1.
  23. Escobar, Arturo. 1994. Encountering Development. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Fan, Fa-Ti. 2012. “The Global Turn in the History of Science.” East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal 6 (2): 249–58.Google Scholar
  25. Fanon, Frantz. 2004 [1961]. The Wretched of the Earth. Translated by Richard Philcox. New York: Grove Press.Google Scholar
  26. Furlong, Kathryn. 2014. “STS beyond the ‘Modern Infrastructure Ideal’: Extending Theory by Engaging with Infrastructure Challenges in the South.” Technology in Society 38 (August): 139–47.Google Scholar
  27. Geels, Frank W. 2002. “Technological Transitions as Evolutionary Reconfiguration Processes: A Multi-level Perspective and a Case-Study.” Research Policy, NELSON + WINTER + 20, 31 (8–9): 1257–74.Google Scholar
  28. ———. 2005. “Conceptual Perspective on Sytems Innovations and Technological Transitions.” In Technological Transitions and System Innovations: A Co-evolutionary and Socio-Technical Analysis, 75–102. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  29. ———. 2014. “Regime Resistance Against Low-Carbon Transitions: Introducing Politics and Power into the Multi-level Perspective.” Theory, Culture & Society 31 (5): 21–40.Google Scholar
  30. Geels, Frank W., and Johan Schot. 2007. “Typology of Sociotechnical Transition Pathways.” Research Policy 36 (3): 399–417.Google Scholar
  31. Grosfoguel, Ramón, and Ana Margarita Cervantes-Rodríguez, eds. 2002. The Modern/Colonial/Capitalist World-System in the Twentieth Century: Global Processes, Antisystemic Movements, and the Geopolitics of Knowledge. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  32. Harding, Sandra. 2008. Sciences from Below: Feminisms, Postcolonialities and Modernities. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  33. ———. 2009. “Postcolonial and Feminist Philosophies of Science and Technology: Convergences and Dissonances.” Postcolonial Studies 12 (4): 401–21.Google Scholar
  34. Henke, Christopher R. 1999. “The Mechanics of Workplace Order: Toward a Sociology of Repair.” Berkeley Journal of Sociology 44: 55–81.Google Scholar
  35. Hess, David J. 2007. Alternative Pathways in Science and Industry: Activism, Innovation, and the Environment in an Era of Globalization. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  36. ———. 2016. Undone Science: Social Movements, Mobilized Publics, and Industrial Transitions. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  37. Hess, David J., Sulfikar Amir, Scott Frickel, Daniel Lee Kleinman, Kelly Moore, and Logan D. A. Williams. 2016. “Structural Inequality and the Politics of Science and Technology.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, edited by Clark Miller, Laurel Smith-Doerr, Ulrike Felt, and Rayvon Fouché, 4th ed. Society for Social Studies of Science. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  38. Hillman, Liz. 2017. “Phaco Turns 50.” Eyeworld, April. https://www.eyeworld.org/phaco-turns-50.
  39. Hughes, Thomas Parke. 1987. “The Evolution of Large Technological Systems.” In The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, edited by Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas Parke Hughes, and Trevor J. Pinch, 51–82. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  40. ———. 1994. “Technological Momentum.” In Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism, edited by Merritt Roe Smith and Leo Marx, 101–14. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  41. Hwang, K. 2008. “International Collaboration in Multilayered Center-Periphery in the Globalization of Science and Technology.” Science Technology & Human Values 33 (1): 101–33.Google Scholar
  42. Jamison, Andrew, and Mikael Hård. 2003. “The Story-Lines of Technological Change: Innovation, Construction and Appropriation.” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 15 (1): 45–59.Google Scholar
  43. Johnson, Jim. 1988. “Mixing Humans with Non-humans? Sociology of a Few Mundane Artefacts.” Social Problems 35: 298–310. Google Scholar
  44. Kaplinsky, Raphael. 1990. “The Institutional Framework of Appropriate Techonology (AT) Development and Diffusion: Brick Manufacture in Three African Countries.” In The Economies of Small: Appropriate Technology in a Changing World, 74–103. Rugby, Warwickshire, UK: Practical Action Publishing.Google Scholar
  45. ———. 2011. “Schumacher Meets Schumpeter: Appropriate Technology below the Radar.” Research Policy 40 (2): 193–203.Google Scholar
  46. Kline, Ronald, and Trevor Pinch. 1996. “Users as Agents of Technological Change: The Social Construction of the Automobile in the Rural United States.” Technology and Culture 37 (4): 763–95.Google Scholar
  47. Malunga, Chiku, and Susan H. Holcombe. 2014. “Endogenous Development: Naïve Romanticism or Practical Route to Sustainable African Development?” Development in Practice 24 (5–6): 615–22.Google Scholar
  48. McMichael, Philip. 2010. Contesting Development: Critical Struggles for Social Change. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  49. McNeil, Maureen. 2005. “Introduction: Postcolonial Technoscience.” Science as Culture 14 (2): 105.Google Scholar
  50. Medical Devices and Surgical Technology Week. 2006. “Frost & Sullivan Presents Alcon with Market Leadership Award.” Medical Devices and Surgical Technology Week, April 9.Google Scholar
  51. Nieusma, Dean. 2007. “Challenging Knowledge Hierarchies: Working Toward Sustainable Development in Sri Lanka’s Energy Sector.” Sustainability: Science Practice and Policy 3: 32–44.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2007.11907990.
  52. Novartis. 2013. “Alcon History and Timeline Represents How We Became the Global Leader in Eye Care.” Retrieved April 28, 2013. http://www.alcon.com/about-alcon/alcon-history.aspx.
  53. Ocular Surgery News U.S. Edition. 2004. “Visionary, Inventor Charles D. Kelman Is Dead at Age 74.” Ocular Surgery News U.S. Edition, July 1. http://www.healio.com/ophthalmology/cataract-surgery/news/print/ocular-surgery-news/%7B0c283179-d00c-43f8-bac9-cc3c779c6e3c%7D/visionary-inventor-charles-d-kelman-is-dead-at-age-74.
  54. Osunmuyiwa, Olufolahan, and Agni Kalfagianni. 2016. “Transitions in Unlikely Places: Exploring the Conditions for Renewable Energy Adoption in Nigeria.” Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. Accessed November 10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2016.07.002.
  55. Ouaissa, Rachid. 2015. “Frantz Fanon: The Empowerment of the Periphery.” Middle East: Topics & Arguments 5 (0): 100–6.Google Scholar
  56. Packard, Randall M. 1997. “Visions of Postwar Health and Development and Their Impact on Public Health Interventions in the Developing World.” In International Development and the Social Sciences: Essays on the History and Politics of Knowledge, edited by Frederick Cooper and Randall M. Packard. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California.Google Scholar
  57. Parthasarathy, Shobita. 2006. “Reconceptualizing Technology Transfer: The Challenge of Shaping an International System of Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer.” In Shaping Science and Technology Policy: The Next Generation of Research, edited by D. H. Guston and D. R. Sarewitz, 333–58. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  58. Pascolini, Donatella, and Silvio Paolo Mariotti. 2012. “Global Estimates of Visual Impairment: 2010.” British Journal of Ophthalmology 96 (5): 614–18.Google Scholar
  59. Pieterse, Jan Nederveen. 1991. “Dilemmas of Development Discourse: The Crisis of Developmentalism and the Comparative Method.” Development and Change 22 (1): 5–29.Google Scholar
  60. ———. 2000. “After Post-development.” Third World Quarterly 21 (2): 175–91.Google Scholar
  61. Pinch, Trevor, and Wiebe E. Bijker. 1987. “The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other.” In The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, edited by Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas Parke Hughes, and Trevor Pinch, 159–87. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  62. Pollock, Anne. 2014. “Places of Pharmaceutical Knowledge-Making: Global Health, Postcolonial Science, and Hope in South African Drug Discovery.” Social Studies of Science 44 (6): 848–73.Google Scholar
  63. Power, Marcus, Peter Newell, Lucy Baker, Harriet Bulkeley, Joshua Kirshner, and Adrian Smith. 2016. “The Political Economy of Energy Transitions in Mozambique and South Africa: The Role of the Rising Powers.” Energy Research & Social Science 17 (July): 10–19.Google Scholar
  64. Raj, Kapil. 2010. “Introduction: Circulation and Locality in Early Modern Science.” The British Journal for the History of Science 43 (Special Issue 04): 513–17.Google Scholar
  65. Ritzer, George. 1996. “The McDonaldization Thesis: Is Expansion Inevitable?” International Sociology 11 (3): 291–308.Google Scholar
  66. Rogers, Everett M. 2003 [1962]. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  67. Roy, Ananya. 2010. Poverty Capital: Microfinance and the Making of Development. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  68. Schumacher, Ernst F. 1973. Small Is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered. London: Blond & Briggs.Google Scholar
  69. Seely, Bruce Edsall. 2003. “Historical Patterns in the Scholarship of Technology Transfer.” Comparative Technology Transfer and Society 1 (1): 7–48.Google Scholar
  70. Singh, Ramesh M., and Dinesh R. Bhuju. 2001. “Development of Science and Technology in Nepal.” Science Technology and Society 6 (1): 159–178.Google Scholar
  71. Slayton, Rebecca, and Graham Spinardi. 2016. “Radical Innovation in Scaling up: Boeing’s Dreamliner and the Challenge of Socio-Technical Transitions.” Technovation 47 (January): 47–58.Google Scholar
  72. Smith, Adrian. 2002. “Transforming Technological Regimes for Sustainable Development: A Role for Appropriate Technology Niches?” 86. SPRU Working Paper Series. UK: University of Sussex. http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Units/spru/publications/imprint/sewps/sewp86/sewp86.html.
  73. Smith, Adrian, Mariano Fressoli, Dinesh Abrol, Elisa Arond, and Adrian Ely. 2016. Grassroots Innovation Movements. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  74. Varma, Roli. 2003. “EF Schumacher: Changing the Paradigm of Bigger Is Better.” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 23 (2): 114–24.Google Scholar
  75. Vasi, Ion Bogdan. 2011. Winds of Change: The Environmental Movement and the Global Development of the Wind Energy Industry. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Visvanathan, Shiv. 2015 [2001]. “Technology Transfer.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, edited by James D Wright, 2nd ed., 141–45. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  77. Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1974. “The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System: Concepts for Comparative Analysis.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 16: 387–415.Google Scholar
  78. Willoughby, Kelvin W. 1990. Technology Choice: A Critique of the Appropriate Technology Movement. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  79. Wilson, John. 1988. “Preventing Blindness, A Retrospective.” In World Blindness and Its Prevention: Volume 3, edited by the International Agency for the Prevention of Blindness and Carl Kupfer. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Winner, L. 1980. “Do Artifacts Have Politics.” Daedalus 109 (1): 121–36.Google Scholar
  81. WHO. 2004. “Global Cataract Surgical Rates in 2004.” Retrieved February 1, 2007. http://www.who.int/blindness/data_maps/CSR_WORLD_2004.jpg.
  82. WHO Executive Board, 55. 1974. “Promotion of National Health Services: Report by the Director-General.” EB55/9. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/148378.
  83. Worthington, Richard. 1993. “Introduction: Science and Technology as a Global System.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 18 (2): 176–85.Google Scholar
  84. Wyatt, Sally ME. 2003. “Non-users Also Matter: The Construction of Users and Non-users of the Internet.” In How Users Matter: The Co-construction of Users and Technology, edited by Nelly Oudshoorn and Trevor Pinch, 67–79. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  85. Xu, Sanchun, and Danian Hu. 2017. “Barefoot Doctors and the ‘Health Care Revolution’ in Rural China: A Study Centered on Shandong Province.” Endeavour, Science, Technology, and Medicine in China’s Cultural Revolution, 41 (3): 136–45.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Logan Williams Consultancy Services, LLCCumberlandUSA

Personalised recommendations