Skip to main content

Knowledge Society, Knowledge Economy and Knowledge Democracy

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Cyber-Development, Cyber-Democracy, and Cyber-Defense

Abstract

Knowledge has become the vital economic resource, especially as the basis of economic growth; but knowledge also is force in other social institutions of modern society, including of course, in governance or the world of work. It also is the case that certified scientific and technical knowledge claims have become the source of many of the social, political and personal problems confronting the economy, the state and the communities of modern societies worldwide. After all it was science and technology that discovered key global challenges of the modern age like ozone depletion, climate change, genetic engineering and the profound transformation of work. What will the future of knowledge societies look like?

Our contribution is based on numerous publications surrounding the theoretical concept of the knowledge society and the phenomenon of knowledge, beginning in 1984 (see Böhme and Stehr 1984). A number but not all relevant publications are listed in the bibliography (for a recent discussion of the concept of the knowledge society see Stehr 2016).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Acemoglu, D., & Autor, D. (2012). What does human capital do? A review of goldin and Katz’s the race between education and technology. Journal of Economic Literature, 50, 426–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adelstein, J., & Clegg, S. (2014). And rewind! Recycling discourses of knowledge work and knowledge society. Management and Organizational History, 9(1), 3–25. doi:10.1080/17449359.2013.821023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altman, D., & Pèrez-Linán, A. (2002). Assessing the quality of democracy: Freedom, competitiveness and participation in eighteen Latin American Countries. Democratization, 9(2), 85–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aron, R. (1962). Eighteen lectures on industrial society. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Autor, D. H. (2015a). Skills, education, and the rise of earnings inequality among the ‘other 99 percent’. Science, 344, 843–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Autor, D. H. (2015b). Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29, 3–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Autor, D. H., & Dorn, D. (2013). The growth of low-skill service jobs and the polarization of the US labor market. American Economic Review, 103, 1553–1597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacon, F. ([1620] 1762). Novum Organum Scientarium. Venetiis: Typis G. Girardi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. (1960). The end of ideology. On the exhaustion of political ideas in the fifties. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. (1973). The coming of post-industrial society. A venture in social forecasting. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. (1988). Afterword. In The end ideology. The exhaustion of political ideas in the fifties (pp. 409–447). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, M. M., & Wallman, S. H. M. (2001). Unseen Wealth. In Report of the Brookings task force on intangibles. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Block, F. (1985). Postindustrial development and the obsolescence of economic categories. Policing and Society, 14, 416–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhme, G., & Stehr, N. (Eds.). (1986). Knowledge society. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. F. J., Carayannis, E. G., & Rehman, S. S. (2015). Quadruple helix structures of quality of democracy in innovation systems: The USA, OECD countries, and EU member countries in global comparison. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 6(3), 467–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2000). The rise of the network society (Vol. 1, 2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crouch, C. (2004). Post-Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crutzen, P. J. (2002). Geology of mankind. Nature, 415(6867), 23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, P. S., & David, P. A. (1994). Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23, 487–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David, P. A., & Foray, D. (2003). Economic fundamentals of the knowledge society. Policy Futures in Education, 1, 20–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. F. ([1968] 1972). The age of discontinuity. In Guidelines to our changing society. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. F. ([1980] 1981). Toward the next economics and other essays (pp. 1–21). New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. F. (1986). The changed world economy. Foreign Affairs, 64, 768–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. F. (1993). The rise of the knowledge society. Wilson Quarterly, 17, 52–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. (1999). Knowledge-worker productivity: The biggest challenge. California Management Review, 41, 79–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J. K. (2014). The end of normal. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, J. (2015). The Friedrich hayek I knew, and what he got right – and wrong. New Statesman. 30 July 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grundmann, R., & Stehr, N. (2012). Experts: The knowledge and power of expertise. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hindman, M. (2009). The myth of digital democracy. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology (2 Vols). London: Holt and Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keynes, J. M. (1936). The general theory of employment, interest and money. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krohn, W. (1981). Ist Wissen Macht? Zur Soziogenese eines neuzeitlichen, wissenschaftlichen Geltungsanspruchs. In K. Bayertz (Ed.), Wissenschaftsgeschichte und wissenschaftliche Revolution (pp. 29–57). Köln: Pahl-Rugenstein.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krohn, W. (1987). Francis Bacon. München: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landemore, H. E. (2012). Why the many are smarter than the few and why it matters. Journal of Public Deliberation, 8, 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landemore, H. (2013). Democratic reason. In Politics, collective intelligence, and the rule of the many. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, R. E. (1966). The decline of politics and ideology in a knowledgeable society. American Sociological Review, 31, 649–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, C. E. (1995). Market and democracy – Obliquely. PS Political Science & Politics, 28, 684–688.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey, R. G. (1992). Global change and economic policy. In N. Stehr & R. V. Ericson (Eds.), The culture and power of knowledge: Inquiries into contemporary societies (pp. 279–299). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lo, A. W. (2015). The Gordon Gekko effect: The role of culture in the financial industry. NBER Working Paper w21267. http://www.nber.org/papers/w21267

  • Luhmann, N. (1990). Die Wissenschaft der Gesellschaft. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt am Main.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machlup, F. (1962). The production and distribution of knowledge in the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machlup, F. (1981). Knowledge and knowledge production. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machlup, F. (1984). The economics of information and human capital. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mair, P. (2013). Ruling the void. In The hollowing of western democracy. London/New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansell, R. (2015). Futures of knowledge societies – Destabilization in whose interest. Information, Communication & Society, 18, 627–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marx, K. (1939–1941). Grundrisse der Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Frankfurt am Main: Europäische Verlagsanstalt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mokyr, J., Vickers, C., & Ziebarth, N. L. (2015). The history of technological anxiety and the future of economic growth: Is this time different? The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29, 31–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogden, M. R. (1994). Politics in a parallel universe: Is there a future for cyberdemocracy? Futures, 26, 713–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2011). Merchants of doubt. London/New Delhi/New York/Sydney: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, M. A., & Reveley, J. (2012). Retrofitting Drucker: Knowledge work under cognitive capitalism. Culture and Organization, 20, 135–151. doi:10.1080/14759551.2012.692591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poster, M. (1995). Cyberdemocracy: Internet and the public sphere. Internet Culture, 201, 218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., & Snellman, K. (2004). The knowledge economy. Annual Review of Sociology, 30(2004), 199–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, G. A. (2015). Is a cambrian explosion coming for robotics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29, 51–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Provident Knowledge Society. (1875). The British Medical Journal, 1, 283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, M. R., & Huber, M. T. (1986). The knowledge industry in the United States, 1960–1980. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruser, A. (2015). By the markets, of the markets, for the markets? Technocratic decision-making and the hollowing out of democracy. Global Policy, 6, 83–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruser, A. (2017). Der (in)diskrete Charme der Technokratie. Wirtschaftskrisen, Staatskrisen und die Entdemokratisierung von Entscheidungsstrukturen. In M. Lehmann & M. Tyrell (Eds.), Komplexe Freiheit. Wie ist Demokratie möglich? (pp. 203–217). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ryle, G. ([1949] 2000). The concept of mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarewitz, D., & Nelson, R. (2008). Three rules for technological fixes. Nature, 456, 871–872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schelsky, H. ([1961] 1965). Der Mensch in der wissenschaftlichen Zivilisation. In H. Schelsky (Eds.), Auf der Suche nach der Wirklichkeit: Gesammelte Aufsätze. Düsseldorf: Diederichs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. ([1942]1962). Theories of democracy. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schütz, A. (1964). In A. Brodersen (Ed.), Collected papers II: Studies in social theory. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellars, W. (1963). Science, perception and reality. Atascadero: Ridgeview Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, C. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 37(379–423), 623–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmel, G. (1906). The sociology of secrecy and of secret societies. American Journal of Sociology, 11, 441–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stehr, N. (1994). Knowledge societies. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stehr, N. (2001). The fragility of modern societies: Knowledge and risk in the information age. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stehr, N. (2002). Knowledge and economic conduct: The social foundations of the modern economy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stehr, N. (2005). Knowledge politics. In Governing the consequences of science and technology. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stehr, N. (2008). Moral markets. How knowledge and affluence change consumers and producers. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stehr, N. (2015). The inconvenience of democracy. Nature, 525, 449–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stehr, N. (2016). Information, power, and democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stehr, N., & Adolf, M. (2017). Knowledge. In Is knowledge power? London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E. (1999). Knowledge as a global public good. In I. Kaul, I. Grunberg, & M. A. Stern (Eds.), Global public goods. International co-operation in the 21st Century (pp. 308–325). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • The Fenwick Improvement of Knowledge. (1920). The Scottish Historical Review, 17, 219–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trenberth, K. (2010). More knowledge, less certainty. Nature Climate Change, 4, 20–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vazquez, A. M., & Gonzalez, P. A. (2016). Knowledge economy and the commons: A theoretical and political approach to post-liberal common governance. Review of Radical Political Economy, 48, 140–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • in’t Veld, R. J. (2010). Knowledge democracy. In Consequences for science, politics, and the media. Heidelberg/Dordrecht/London/New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1992). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nico Stehr .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Section Editor information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this entry

Cite this entry

Stehr, N., Ruser, A. (2017). Knowledge Society, Knowledge Economy and Knowledge Democracy. In: Carayannis, E., Campbell, D., Efthymiopoulos, M. (eds) Handbook of Cyber-Development, Cyber-Democracy, and Cyber-Defense. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06091-0_16-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06091-0_16-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-06091-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-06091-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Economics and FinanceReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics