IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hig/fsight/v9y2015i1p6-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Embeddedness of Technology: Prospective Research Areas

Author

Listed:
  • Mariya Dobryakova

    (Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge, National Research University Higher School of Economics (Russian Federation))

  • Zoya Kotelnikova

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics (Russian Federation))

Abstract

Strategic documents that reflect future S&T priorities are often formulated without sufficiently taking into account the social context of S&T developments. The paper discusses the capabilities of social sciences for a deeper contextual analysis when setting priorities and, consequently, for helping to make the diffusion of advanced technologies more efficient. The methodological basis of the analysis is the concept of the social construction of technology (SCOT). The list of critical technologies of the Russian Federation serves as an illustrative example of a strategic document defining S&T priorities. The authors point out developments with the highest potential for social embeddedness, which could be fully used only if coupled with an understanding of related social matters. These developments are divided into four groups (clusters): biomedicine and health, energy, environment, and transport. We identify for each cluster the social groups that would be affected by the relevant technologies, the potential for conflicts of interest and for formats of interaction. The paper proposes prospective areas of sociological research, allowing a deeper understanding of the real context in which new technologies might be developed and implemented, and thus may help optimize efforts for the diffusion of these technologies. We conclude that many prospective technologies, which by nature belong to the 'physical' world, would be more efficient if their implementation, and possibly also development, were accompanied (and in some cases preceded) by the outputs of relevant social science and humanities studies. In this sense, we propose the use of the 'social embeddedness of technology' concept. We argue that this is an important factor affecting the success of technology implementation, and sometimes, technology configuration.

Suggested Citation

  • Mariya Dobryakova & Zoya Kotelnikova, 2015. "Social Embeddedness of Technology: Prospective Research Areas," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 6-19.
  • Handle: RePEc:hig:fsight:v:9:y:2015:i:1:p:6-19
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://foresight-journal.hse.ru/data/2015/04/07/1096413223/1-Dobryakova-6-19.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lehrer, Mark & Asakawa, Kazuhiro, 2004. "Rethinking the public sector: idiosyncrasies of biotechnology commercialization as motors of national R&D reform in Germany and Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 921-938, September.
    2. Fortes, Patrícia & Alvarenga, António & Seixas, Júlia & Rodrigues, Sofia, 2015. "Long-term energy scenarios: Bridging the gap between socio-economic storylines and energy modeling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 161-178.
    3. Shapiro, Brian & Baker, C. Richard, 2001. "Information technology and the social construction of information privacy," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4-5), pages 295-322.
    4. Eszter Bartis, 2007. "Two suggested extensions for SCOT: Technological frames and metaphors," Society and Economy, Akadémiai Kiadó, Hungary, vol. 29(1), pages 123-138, April.
    5. Andrey Shcherbak, 2013. "The Impact of Tolerance on Economic Modernization in a Comparative Perspective," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 7(4), pages 6-15.
    6. Alexander Sokolov, 2007. "Method of Critical Technologies," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 1(4), pages 64-74.
    7. Ram, Camelia & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2013. "Exploring the impact of evaluating strategic options in a scenario-based multi-criteria framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 657-672.
    8. Herrera-Vega, Eliana, 2015. "Relevance of N. Luhmann's theory of social systems to understand the essence of technology today. The Case of the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 25-42.
    9. Schoemaker, Paul J.H. & Day, George S. & Snyder, Scott A., 2013. "Integrating organizational networks, weak signals, strategic radars and scenario planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 815-824.
    10. Rodríguez, Hannot & Fisher, Erik & Schuurbiers, Daan, 2013. "Integrating science and society in European Framework Programmes: Trends in project-level solicitations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1126-1137.
    11. Wydra, Sven, 2015. "Challenges for technology diffusion policy to achieve socio-economic goals," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 76-90.
    12. De Smedt, Peter & Borch, Kristian & Fuller, Ted, 2013. "Future scenarios to inspire innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 432-443.
    13. Forsberg, Ellen-Marie & Quaglio, GianLuca & O'Kane, Hannah & Karapiperis, Theodoros & Van Woensel, Lieve & Arnaldi, Simone, 2015. "Assessment of science and technologies: Advising for and with responsibility," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 21-27.
    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. Cheng, M.N. & Wong, Jane W.K. & Cheung, C.F. & Leung, K.H., 2016. "A scenario-based roadmapping method for strategic planning and forecasting: A case study in a testing, inspection and certification company," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 44-62.
    2. Wright, George & Cairns, George & O'Brien, Frances A. & Goodwin, Paul, 2019. "Scenario analysis to support decision making in addressing wicked problems: Pitfalls and potential," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 3-19.
    3. Diego F. Uribe & Isabel Ortiz-Marcos & Ángel Uruburu, 2018. "What Is Going on with Stakeholder Theory in Project Management Literature? A Symbiotic Relationship for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-23, April.
    4. Ramboarison-Lalao, Lovanirina & Gannouni, Kais, 2019. "Liberated firm, a leverage of well-being and technological change? A prospective study based on the scenario method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 129-139.
    5. Bourgeois, Robin & Penunia, Esther & Bisht, Sonali & Boruk, Don, 2017. "Foresight for all: Co-elaborative scenario building and empowerment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 178-188.
    6. Tobias Witt & Matthias Klumpp, 2021. "Multi-Period Multi-Criteria Decision Making under Uncertainty: A Renewable Energy Transition Case from Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, June.
    7. Tiberius, Victor & Siglow, Caroline & Sendra-García, Javier, 2020. "Scenarios in business and management: The current stock and research opportunities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 235-242.
    8. Bouhalleb, Arafet & Tapinos, Efstathios, 2023. "The impact of scenario planning on entrepreneurial orientation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    9. Gary Bowman & R. Bradley MacKay, 2020. "Scenario planning as strategic activity: A practice‐orientated approach," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3-4), September.
    10. Lukovics, Miklós & Flipse, Steven M. & Udvari, Beáta & Fisher, Erik, 2017. "Responsible research and innovation in contrasting innovation environments: Socio-Technical Integration Research in Hungary and the Netherlands," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 172-182.
    11. Yusuf, Shahid & Nabeshima, Kaoru, 2005. "Japan's changing industrial landscape," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3758, The World Bank.
    12. Meissner, Philip & Brands, Christian & Wulf, Torsten, 2017. "Quantifiying blind spots and weak signals in executive judgment: A structured integration of expert judgment into the scenario development process," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 244-253.
    13. Spaniol, Matthew J. & Rowland, Nicholas J., 2022. "Business ecosystems and the view from the future: The use of corporate foresight by stakeholders of the Ro-Ro shipping ecosystem in the Baltic Sea Region," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    14. Alexander Sokolov & Alexander Chulok, 2012. "Russian Science and Technology Foresight – 2030: Key Features and First Results," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 12-25.
    15. Sara Amoroso & Alex Coad & Nicola Grassano, 2017. "European R&D networks: A snapshot from the 7th EU Framework Programme," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation JRC107546, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    16. Valérie Revest & Alessandro Sapio, 2012. "Financing technology-based small firms in Europe: what do we know?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 179-205, July.
    17. Jongwoo Kim & Richard L. Baskerville & Yi Ding, 2020. "Breaking the Privacy Kill Chain: Protecting Individual and Group Privacy Online," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 171-185, February.
    18. Lazar Gitelman & Mikhail Kozhevnikov & Olga Ryzhuk, 2019. "Advance Management Education for Power-Engineering and Industry of the Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-23, October.
    19. Thomas Pregger & Tobias Naegler & Wolfgang Weimer-Jehle & Sigrid Prehofer & Wolfgang Hauser, 2020. "Moving towards socio-technical scenarios of the German energy transition—lessons learned from integrated energy scenario building," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(4), pages 1743-1762, October.
    20. Derbyshire, James, 2017. "Potential surprise theory as a theoretical foundation for scenario planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 77-87.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    social construction of technology (SCOT); diffusion of innovation; social embeddedness; social sciences; humanities; prospective research areas;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hig:fsight:v:9:y:2015:i:1:p:6-19. 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: Nataliya Gavrilicheva or Mikhail Salazkin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hsecoru.html .

    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.