IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v53y2018icp161-172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experimenting with a novel technology for provision of safe drinking water in rural Bangladesh: The case of sub-surface arsenic removal (SAR)

Author

Listed:
  • Kundu, Debasish Kumar
  • Gupta, Aarti
  • Mol, Arthur P.J.
  • Rahman, Mohammad Moshiur
  • van Halem, Doris

Abstract

Subsurface Arsenic Removal (SAR) is a technique used for in-situ removal of naturally occurring arsenic in groundwater. This new technology was deployed recently on an experimental basis in two sites in rural Bangladesh, to address the pressing problem of rural drinking water supplies contaminated by arsenic. This article assesses whether and to what extent these first field experiments with SAR can be conceptualized as “socio-technical experiments” designed to incubate and improve radical technological innovations by serving as ‘living lab”, “window” and/or “agent of change”. As per writings in transition theory, an experiment functions as a living lab if it permits testing, learning and improving upon a technological innovation. It functions as a window if it is able to facilitate communication and conversation by raising actors’ interest and enrolling new actors. It functions as an agent of change if it can successfully stimulate changes in potential users' practices and behaviours. Through studying two SAR experiments, this article finds that this novel technology served as a living lab and window, but not (yet) as agent of change, partly because integrating social considerations (such as community buy-in, appropriate site selection and post-installation support) into SAR prototype design during field experimentation proved very difficult. A key obstacle was that the technical efficacy of the technology remained a primary concern during experimentation, and it was unsafe to make water deriving from experimental SAR units available to users. The technology thus remained an abstract idea and provided unable to stimulate behavioural changes amongst users. We conclude that there is a need to identify conditions under which real world experiments can serve as agents of change to facilitate sustainable uptake of arsenic safe technologies in rural developing country contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Kundu, Debasish Kumar & Gupta, Aarti & Mol, Arthur P.J. & Rahman, Mohammad Moshiur & van Halem, Doris, 2018. "Experimenting with a novel technology for provision of safe drinking water in rural Bangladesh: The case of sub-surface arsenic removal (SAR)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 161-172.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:53:y:2018:i:c:p:161-172
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.01.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X17300763
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.01.010?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    2. ., 1998. "Technological Change," Chapters, in: Heinz D. Kurz & Neri Salvadori (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Classical Economics, volume 0, chapter 127, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lee, Junmin & Kim, Keungoui & Kim, Jiyong & Hwang, Junseok, 2022. "The relationship between shared mobility and regulation in South Korea: A system dynamics approach from the socio-technical transitions perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. Geels, Frank W. & Kemp, René, 2007. "Dynamics in socio-technical systems: Typology of change processes and contrasting case studies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 441-455.
    3. Fagerberg, Jan, 2018. "Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1568-1576.
    4. Gürsan, C. & de Gooyert, V., 2021. "The systemic impact of a transition fuel: Does natural gas help or hinder the energy transition?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    5. Kriechbaum, Michael & Posch, Alfred & Hauswiesner, Angelika, 2021. "Hype cycles during socio-technical transitions: The dynamics of collective expectations about renewable energy in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    6. Truffer, Bernhard & Schippl, Jens & Fleischer, Torsten, 2017. "Decentering technology in technology assessment: prospects for socio-technical transitions in electric mobility in Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 34-48.
    7. Canitez, Fatih, 2019. "Pathways to sustainable urban mobility in developing megacities: A socio-technical transition perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 319-329.
    8. Veldhuizen, Caroline, 2020. "Smart Specialisation as a transition management framework: Driving sustainability-focused regional innovation policy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(6).
    9. Befort, N., 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    10. Moradi, Afsaneh & Vagnoni, Emidia, 2018. "A multi-level perspective analysis of urban mobility system dynamics: What are the future transition pathways?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 231-243.
    11. Roesler, Tim & Hassler, Markus, 2019. "Creating niches – The role of policy for the implementation of bioenergy village cooperatives in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 95-101.
    12. Lode, M.L. & te Boveldt, G. & Coosemans, T. & Ramirez Camargo, L., 2022. "A transition perspective on Energy Communities: A systematic literature review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    13. Kivimaa, Paula & Boon, Wouter & Hyysalo, Sampsa & Klerkx, Laurens, 2019. "Towards a typology of intermediaries in sustainability transitions: A systematic review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 1062-1075.
    14. Dijk, Marc & Orsato, Renato J. & Kemp, René, 2015. "Towards a regime-based typology of market evolution," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 276-289.
    15. Galvin, Ray, 2018. "‘Them and us’: Regional-national power-plays in the German energy transformation: A case study in Lower Franconia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 269-277.
    16. Yu, Zhen & Gibbs, David, 2018. "Encircling cities from rural areas? Barriers to the diffusion of solar water heaters in China's urban market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 366-373.
    17. Raven, Rob & Walrave, Bob, 2020. "Overcoming transformational failures through policy mixes in the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    18. Simmons, Geoff & Giraldo, Jorge Esteban Diez & Truong, Yann & Palmer, Mark, 2018. "Uncovering the link between governance as an innovation process and socio-economic regime transition in cities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 241-251.
    19. Barton, John & Davies, Lloyd & Dooley, Ben & Foxon, Timothy J. & Galloway, Stuart & Hammond, Geoffrey P. & O’Grady, Áine & Robertson, Elizabeth & Thomson, Murray, 2018. "Transition pathways for a UK low-carbon electricity system: Comparing scenarios and technology implications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2779-2790.
    20. Svensson, Oscar & Nikoleris, Alexandra, 2018. "Structure reconsidered: Towards new foundations of explanatory transitions theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 462-473.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:53:y:2018:i:c:p:161-172. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.