Abstract
The assessment of the impacts of sociotechnical futures on processes of innovation is a continuing challenge for technology assessment (TA). Imaginations of the future shape communications and actions in the present. They do not deliver any information about the outcome of these processes. This seems to contradict the task of TA to provide future-oriented knowledge. But vision assessment can provide knowledge concerning ongoing changes in sociotechnical arrangements and options for intervention. Our approach presents a heuristic for analyzing visions as socio-epistemic practices, which rearrange actors in innovation processes. In our cases—Big Data, Smart Grid and FabLabs—we identify dynamics in power constellations which might enable or restrain future innovations.
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
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
The analytical concept of “visions as socio-epistemic practices” was elaborated during the first period of the ITAS-project “Visions as socio-epistemic practices. Theoretical foundation and practical application of vision assessment in technology assessment”. See: https://www.itas.kit.edu/english/projects_loes14_luv.php. In the current second period we develop this concept further on.
- 2.
Our understanding of power constellations is oriented towards the relational concept of power of Foucault (e.g.; Foucault 1978, pp. 93–94). From this perspective options of influencing others, i.e. steering decisions and developments, depend upon the relational positions between all actors in an arrangement.
- 3.
A slightly different depiction of these cases, which does not reflect on the power constellations, is already published in Lösch et al. (2017).
- 4.
The vision itself is not understood as a stable and clearly defined entity. The vision is what the practices produce in reference to the imaginary point in the future. Similar for visionary images and discursive references as producers of their meanings see Lösch (2006).
- 5.
The basis for this paragraph is a literature research in 2016 and the results of an expert workshop with participants from science, industry, politics, non-governmental organizations and data protection within the framework of the BMBF project “Assessing Big Data”: https://www.itas.kit.edu/english/projects_grun15_abida.php.
- 6.
An example is the use of social network data for credit scoring (e.g. Wei et al. 2016).
- 7.
The insights in this paragraph draw upon Lösch and Schneider (2016) where a more detailed analysis of an empirical study of smart grid visions in practice based on a document analysis and qualitative expert interviews can be found. The empirical work was conducted within the research project “Systemic risks in energy infrastructures”, one of the projects of the Helmholtz alliance “Energy-Trans” (http://www.energy-trans.de/english/68.php). The document analysis included policy documents issued between 2007 and 2014 on the energy transition and smart grids mainly in Germany but also in the USA. Furthermore, it considered scientific texts on smart grid technologies from 1997 to 2014. In addition, a series of qualitative expert interviews was conducted in 2013. These included experts from power supply companies, an association of local utility companies, an industry association, an environmental association, a consumer protection association, technology companies and scientific experts, especially economists.
- 8.
As one consumer protection expert put it, “there is a completely different basic structure in the system and a regional responsibility and I think that is not yet properly communicated” (Consumer Protection Association 2013). Similarly, an environmental association expert states, “Now we’re arriving at a certain stage where we want to turn the whole system upside down. There is an infinite number of actors that have to be included into the system” (Environmental Association 2013).
- 9.
This analysis is based upon an in-depth study of the emergence of FabLabs and the foundation of a grassroots FabLab that draws upon mixed qualitative methods such as participant observation, document analysis, action research, and interviews (Schneider 2017, forthcoming).
References
Adam, B., & Groves, C. (2007). Future matters: action, knowledge, ethics. Leiden: Brill.
Alvial Palavicino, C. (2016). Mindful anticipation: A practice approach to the study of expectations in emerging technologies. Enschede: Twente University.
Anderson, B. (2010). Preemption, precaution, preparedness: Anticipatory action and future geographies. Progress in Human Geography, 34(6), 777–798.
BMU & BMWi. (2011). The Federal Government’s energy concept of 2010 and the transformation of the energy system of 2011. Munich: Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology and Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety.
BMWi. (2014). Smart energy made in Germany. Erkenntnisse zum Aufbau und zur Nutzung intelligenter Energiesysteme im Rahmen der Energiewende. Berlin: Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie.
Böhle, K., & Bopp, K. (2014). What a vision: The artificial companion. A piece of vision assessment including an expert survey. Science, Technology & Innovation Studies, 10(1), 155–186.
Borup, M., Brown, N., Konrad, K., & van Lente, H. (2006). The sociology of expectations in science and technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(3–4), 285–298.
Boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data-Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679.
Brown, N., Rappert, B., & Webster, A. (Eds.). (2000). Contested futures: A sociology of prospective techno-science. Farnham: Ashgate.
Consumer Protection Association. (2013). Transcript of an expert interview with a spokesperson of a German Consumer Protection Association, conducted in 2013, quotations from the German language transcript translated to English by the authors.
Covrig, C. F., Ardelean, M., Vasiljevska, J., Mengolini, A., Fulli, G., & Amoiralis, E. (2014). Smart grid projects outlook 2014. EUR-Scientific and technical research series. Luxembourg: Office of the European Union.
Crawford, K., Miltner, K., & Gray, M. L. (2014). Critiquing big data: Politics, ethics, epistemology. International Journal of Communication, 8, 1663–1672.
Dickel, S., & Schrape, J.-F. (2017a). The renaissance of techno-utopianism as a challenge for responsible innovation. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 4(2), 289–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1310523.
Dickel, S., & Schrape, J.-F. (2017b). The logic of digital utopianism. Nanoethics, 11, 47–58.
Dierkes, M., Hoffman, U., & Marz, L. (1996). Visions of technology. Social and institutional factors sha** the development of new technologies. Frankfurt a. M.: Campus.
Energy Supply Company. (2013). Transcript of an expert interview with the head of an innovation group of one of the big German energy supply companies, conducted in 2013, quotations from the German language transcript translated to English by the authors.
Engels, F., & Münch, A. V. (2015). The micro smart grid as a materialised imaginary within the German energy transition. Energy Research & Social Science, 9, 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.08.024.
Environmental Association. (2013). Transcript of an expert interview with a leading expert for Renewable Energies from a German Environmental Association, conducted in 2013, quotations from the German language transcript translated to English by the authors.
Ferrari, A., & Lösch, A. (2017). How smart grid meets In Vitro meat: On visions as socio-epistemic practices. Nanoethics, 11, 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-017-0282-9.
Ferrari, A., Coenen, C., & Grunwald, A. (2012). Visions and ethics in current discourse on human enhancement. Nanoethics, 6(3), 215–229.
Foucault, M. (1978). The History of Sexuality: An Introduction. Vol. 1. New York: Vintage.
Gershenfeld, N. (2005). Fab: The coming revolution on your desktop–From personal computers to personal fabrication. New York: Basic Books.
Gershenfeld, N. (2012). How to make almost anything: The digital fabrication revolution. Foreign Affairs, 91, 43.
Goulden, M., Bedwell, B., Rennick-Egglestone, S., Rodden, T., & Spence, A. (2014). Smart grids, smart users? The role of the user in demand side management. Energy Research & Social Science, 2, 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2014.04.
Grin, J., & Grunwald, A. (Eds.). (2000). Vision assessment: Sha** technology in 21st century society. Towards a repertoire for technology assessment. Berlin: Springer.
Grunwald, A. (2014). The hermeneutic side of responsible research and innovation. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 1(3), 274–291.
Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S.-H. (2015). Dreamscapes of modernity. Sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1997). Sociality with objects. Social relations in postsocial knowledge societies. Theory, Culture and Society, 14(4), 1–30.
Konrad, K. (2006). The social dynamics of expectations: The interaction of collective and actor-specific expectations on electronic commerce and interactive television. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(3–4), 429–444.
Lösch, A. (2006). Anticipating the futures of nanotechnology: Visionary images as means of communication. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(3–4), 393–409.
Lösch, A., & Schneider, C. (2016). Transforming power/knowledge apparatuses: the smart grid in the German energy transition. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 29(3), 262–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2016.1154783.
Lösch, A., Heil, R., & Schneider, C. (2017). Responsibilization through visions. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 4(82), 138–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1360717.
Luhmann, N. (1998). Describing the future. In N. Luhmann (Ed.), Observations on modernity (pp. 63–74). Stanford: University Press.
Manjoo, F. (26 June 2014). Larry Page on Google’s Many Arms. New York Times, B1.
Morozov, E. (2013). To save everything, click here: The folly of technological solutionism. New York: PublicAffairs.
Nordmann, A. (2007). If and then: A critique of speculative nanoethics. Nanoethics, 1, 31–46.
Nordmann, A. (2010). Forensics of wishing: Technology assessment in the age of technoscience. Poiesis & Praxis, 7(1), 5–15.
Nyborg, S., & Røpke, I. (2013). Constructing users in the smart grid-Insights from the Danish eFlex Project. Energy Efficiency, 6(4), 655–670. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-013-9210-1.
Prodhan, G., & Nienaber, M. (2015). Merkel urges Germans to put aside fear of big data. Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-technology-merkel-idUSKBN0OP2EM20150609.
Ramchurn, S. D., Vytelingum, P., Rogers, A., & Jennings, N. R. (2012). Putting the ‘Smarts’ into the smart grid: A grand challenge for artificial intelligence. Communications of the ACM, 55(4), 86–97. https://doi.org/10.1145/2133806.2133825.
Schneider, C. (2017). Transforming TechKnowledgies: the case of open digital fabrication. PhD thesis. Munich, Germany, Technical University of Munich. https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/?id=1339289.
Schneider, C. (forthcoming). The becoming public of open digital fabrication. In S. Maasen, S. Dickel, & C. Schneider (Eds.), TechnoScienceSociety. Technological reconfigurations of science and society. Heidelberg: Springer.
Schrape, J. (2016). Big data: Informatisierung der Gesellschaft 4.0. Berliner Debatte Initial, 27(4), 12–21.
Smith, A., Fressoli, M., Abrol, D., Arond, E., & Ely, A. (2016). Grassroots innovation movements. Abingdon: Routledge.
Söderberg, J. (2014). Reproducing wealth without money, one 3D printer at a time: The cunning of instrumental reason. Journal of Peer Production, 1(4), 1–10.
Star, S. L. (2010). This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science Technology Human Values, 35(5), 601–617.
Tech, R. P. G., Ferdinand, J.-P., & Dopfer, M. (2016). Open source hardware startups and their communities. In J.-P. Ferdinand, U. Petschow, & S. Dickel (Eds.), The decentralized and networked future of value creation (pp. 129–145). Dordrecht: Springer.
Troxler, P. (2014). Fab Labs forked: A grassroots insurgency inside the next industrial revolution. Journal of Peer Production, 5, 1–3.
Troxler, P. (2015). Beyond consenting nerds: Lateral design patterns for new manufacturing. Amsterdam: Hogeschool Rotterdam Uitgeverij.
Turner, F. (2006). From counterculture to cyberculture: Stewart brand, the whole earth network, and the rise of digital utopianism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
van Lente, H. (1993). Promising technology. The dynamics of expectations in technological developments. Dissertation, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands.
van Lente, H. (2012). Navigating foresight in a sea of expectations: lessons from the sociology of expectations. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 24(8), 769–782.
von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Walter-Herrmann, J., & Büching, C. (Eds.). (2013). FabLab: Of machines, makers and inventors. Bielefeld: transcript.
Wei, Y., Yildirim, P., van den Bulte, C., & Dellarocas, C. (2016). Credit scoring with social network data. Marketing Science, 35(2), 234–258.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lösch, A., Heil, R., Schneider, C. (2019). Visionary Practices Sha** Power Constellations. In: Lösch, A., Grunwald, A., Meister, M., Schulz-Schaeffer, I. (eds) Socio-Technical Futures Sha** the Present. Technikzukünfte, Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft / Futures of Technology, Science and Society. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27155-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27155-8_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-27154-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-27155-8
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)