The Politics of User-Driven Innovation: On innovative users, do-able needs, and frugal robots
Abstract
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Akrich, M. (1992). The De-Scription of Technical Objects. In W. E. Bijker & J. Law (eds.), Shaping Technology/Building Society. Studies in Sociotechnical Change (p. 205-224). MIT Press.
Akrich, M., Callon, M., & Latour, B. (2002). The Key to Success in Innovation Part I. The Art of Interessement. International Journal of Innovation Management, 6(2), 187-206.
Bergschöld, J. M., Neven, L., & Peine, A. (2020). DIY gerontechnology: circumventing mismatched technologies and bureaucratic procedure by creating care technologies of one's own. Sociology of Health & Illness, 42(2), 232-246.
Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. J. (2012[1987]). The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts. Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes & T. J. Pinch (eds.), The social construction of technological systems. New directions in the sociology and history of technology (p. 11-44). MIT Press.
Bischof, A. (2017). Soziale Maschinen bauen. Epistemische Praktiken der Sozialrobotik. Transcript (Science Studies).
Boon, W., & Edler, J. (2018). Demand, challenges, and innovation. Making sense of new trends in innovation policy. Science and Public Policy, 45(4), 435-447.
Brown, N., & Michael, M. (2003). A Sociology of Expectations. Retrospecting Prospects and Prospecting Retrospects. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 15(1), 3-18.
Chesbrough, H., & Appleyard, M. M. (2007). Open Innovation and Strategy. California Management Review, 50(1), 57-76.
Chilvers, J., & Kearnes, M. (2020). Remaking Participation in Science and Democracy. In Science, Technology, and Human Values, 45(3), 347-380.
CLARC (2016). smart CLinic Assistant Robot for CGA. Knowledge Collection. Version 2.1, June 2016. https://echord.eu/public/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/PDTI-Health%E2%80%93CLARK%E2%80%93End-User-Involvement.pdf
Debackere, K., Andersen, B., Dvorak, I., Enkel, E., Krüger, P., Malmqvist, H. et al. (2014). Boosting Open Innovation and Knowledge Transfer in the European Union. Independent Expert Group Report on Open Innovation and Knowledge Transfer. https://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/pdf/b1_studies-b5_web-publication_mainreport-kt_oi.pdf
Delvenne, P., & Macq, H. (2020). Breaking Bad with the Participatory Turn? Accelerating Time and Intensifying Value in Participatory Experiments. Science as Culture, 29(2), 245-268.
ECHORD (2015a). Robotics for the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) Challenge. Version 25.1.2015.
ECHORD (2015b). Robotics for the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) Challenge. Version 4.5.2015. https://echord.eu/public/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/E-CGA-ChallengeBrief_revised_v4.pdf
ECHORD (2016). Guide for Applicants. ECHORD++ PDTI activities. https://docplayer.net/storage/24/2544601/1548873718/s9sMwjded6aSdMkPnUlt2A/2544601.pdf
ECHORD (2018a). Our mission: from lab to market. http://echord.eu/the-mission-from-lab-to-market/
ECHORD (2018b). Public end-user Driven Technological Innovation (PDTI). http://echord.eu/pdti/
Edler, J., & Georghiou, L. (2007). Public procurement and innovation—Resurrecting the demand side. Research Policy, 36(7), 949-963.
Engels, F., Wentland, A., & Pfotenhauer, S. (2019). Testing future societies? Developing a framework for test beds and living labs as instruments of innovation governance. Research Policy, 48(9), 103826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.103826
European Commission (2007). Pre-commercial Procurement: Driving innovation to ensure sustainable high quality public services in Europe. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2007:0799:FIN:EN:PDF
European Commission (2010b). Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative. Innovation Union. Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/440f4722-e9ad-43b2-892a-aba42909c54a/language-en
European Commission (2010a). Europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Communication from the Comission Europe 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/COMPLET%20EN%20BARROSO%20%20%20007%20-%20Europe%202020%20-%20EN%20version.pdf
European Union (2020). Ageing Europe. Looking at the lives of older people in the EU. Publications Office of the European Union. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3217494/11478057/KS-02-20-655-EN-N.pdf/9b09606c-d4e8-4c33-63d2-3b20d5c19c91?t=1604055531000
Felt, U., & Fochler, M. (2010). Machineries for Making Publics: Inscribing and De-scribing Publics in Public Engagement. Minerva, 48(3), 219-238.
Felt, U., & Wynne, B. (2007). Taking European knowledge society seriously. Report of the Expert Group on Science and Governance to the Science, Economy and Society. Directorate-General for Research, European Commission. (EUR, EUR-22700). http://publications.europa.eu/de/publication-detail/-/publication/5d0e77c7-2948-4ef5-aec7-bd18efe3c442
Foucault, M. (1997). What is Critique? In S. Lotringer & L. Hochroth (eds.), The politics of truth (p. 23-82). Semiotext(e).
Fujimura, J. (1987). Constructing 'Do-Able' Problems in Cancer Research: Articulating Alignment. Social Studies of Science, 17(2), 257-293.
Gardner, J., Samuel, G., & Williams, C. (2015). Sociology of Low Expectations: Recalibration as Innovation Work in Biomedicine. Science, Technology and Human Values, 40(6), 998-1021.
Godin, B. (2015). Innovation contested. The idea of innovation over the centuries. Routledge.
Godin, B., & Vinck, D. (eds.) (2017). Critical studies of innovation. Alternative approaches to the pro-innovation bias. Edward Elgar.
von Hippel, E. (1986). Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts. In Management Science, 32(7), 791-805.
von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing Innovation. MIT Press.
Irwin, A. (2001). Constructing the scientific citizen: Science and democracy in the biosciences. Public Understanding of Science, 10(1), 1-18.
Irwin, A. (2006). The Politics of Talk: Coming to Terms with the 'New' Scientific Governance. Social Studies of Science, 36(2), 299-320.
Kline, R., & Pinch, T. (1996). Users as Agents of Technological Change: The Social Construction of the Automobile in the Rural United States. Technology and Culture, 37(4), 763-795.
Laurent, B. (2011). Technologies of Democracy: Experiments and Demonstrations. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(4), 649-666.
Lipp, B. (2019). Interfacing RobotCare. On the Techno-Politics of Innovation. Doctoral dissertation, Technical University of Munich.
Lipp, B. (2022). Caring for robots. How care comes to matter in human-machine interfacing. Social Studies of Science, April 7. https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127221081446
Lipp, B., & Maasen, S. (2022) Techno-bio-politics. On Interfacing Life with and Through Technology. NanoEthics, 16, 133-150.
Macq, H., Parotte, C., & Delvenne, P. (2021). Exploring Frictions of Participatory Innovation between Sites and Scales. Science as Culture, 30(2), 161-171.
Macq, H., Tancoigne, E., & Strasser, B. J. (2020). From Deliberation to Production: Public Participation in Science and Technology Policies of the European Commission (1998-2019). Minerva, 13(3), 489-512.
Maibaum, A., Bischof, A., Hergesell, J., & Lipp, B. (2021). A critique of robotics in health care. AI & Society, 37, 467-477.
Marres, N. (2012). Material participation. Technology, the environment and everyday publics. Palgrave Macmillan.
Michael, M. (2009). Publics performing publics: Of PiGs, PiPs and politics. Public Understanding of Science, 18(5), 617-631.
Möllers, N. (2016). Shifting in and out of context: Technoscientific drama as technology of the self. Social Studies of Science, 46(3), 351-373.
Neven, L. (2011). Representations of the old and ageing in the design of the new and emerging. Assessing the design of ambient intelligence technologies for older people. University of Twente.
Östlund, B. (2010). Silver Age Innovators: A New Approach to Old Users. In F. Kohlbacher & C. Herstatt (eds.), The Silver Market Phenomenon (p. 15-26). Springer.
Oudshoorn, N., & Pinch, T. (eds.) (2005). How Users Matter. The Co-Construction of Users and Technology. MIT Press.
Peine, A, & Neven, L. (2019). From Intervention to Co-constitution: New Directions in Theorizing about Aging and Technology. The Gerontologist, 59(1), 15-21.
Peine, A., Rollwagen, I., Neven, L. (2014). The rise of the “innosumer” – Rethinking older technology users. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 82, 199-214.
Peine, A., van Cooten, V., & Neven, L. (2017). Rejuvenating Design. Bikes, Batteries, and Older Adopters in the Diffusion of E-bikes. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 42(3), 429-459.
Pfotenhauer, S., & Jasanoff, S. (2017). Panacea or diagnosis? Imaginaries of innovation and the 'MIT model' in three political cultures. Social Studies of Science, 47(6), 783-810.
Pfotenhauer, S., & Juhl, J. (2017). Innovation and the political state: beyond the myth of technologies and markets. In B. Godin & D. Vinck (eds.), Critical studies of innovation. Alternative approaches to the pro-innovation bias (p. 68-93). Edward Elgar.
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 5-14.
Puig-Pey, A., Bolea, Y., Grau, A., & Casanovas, J. (2017). Public entities driven robotic innovation in urban areas. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 92, 162-172.
Radjou, N., Prabhu, J., & Ahuja, S. (2012). Jugaad Innovation: Think Frugal, be Flexible, Generate Breakthrough Growth. Jossey-Bass.
Ramaswamy, V., & Ozcan, K. (2014). The Co-Creation Paradigm. Stanford University Press.
Rhee, J. (2018). The Robotic Imaginary. The Human and the Price of Dehumanized Labor. University of Minnesota Press.
Ritzer, G., & Jurgenson, N. (2010). Production, Consumption, Prosumption: The nature of capitalism in the age of the digital 'prosumer'. Journal of Consumer Culture, 10(1), 13-36.
Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1568-1580.
Stuckler, D., Reeves, A., Loopstra, R., Karanikolos, M., & McKee, M. (2017). Austerity and health: the impact in the UK and Europe. European journal of public health, 27(4), 18-21.
Toffler, A. (1989). The third wave. Bantam Books.
Tyfield, D. (2012). A Cultural Political Economy of Research and Innovation in an Age of Crisis. Minerva, 50(2), 149-167.
United Nations (Ed.) (2019). World Population Prospects 2019. Volume II: Demographic Profiles. New York.
Vallès-Peris, N., & Domènech, M. (2020). Roboticists’ Imaginaries of Robots for Care: The Radical Imaginary as a Tool for an Ethical Discussion. Engineering Studies, 12(3), 157-176.
van Lente, H. (1993). Promising technology. The dynamics of expectations in technological developments. Dissertation. University of Twente.
Vertesi, J., Ribes, D., Forlano, L., Loukissas, Y., & Leavitt Cohn, M. (2017). Engaging, Designing, and Making Digital Systems. In U. Felt, R. Fouché, C. A. Miller & L. Smith-Doerr (eds.), The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (p. 169-193). MIT Press.
Woolgar, S. (1991). Configuring the user. the case of usability trials. In J. Law (Ed.), A Sociology of Monsters. Essays on Power, Technology and Domination (p. 57-99). Routledge.
Wynne, B. (2006). Public engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science. Hitting the notes, but missing the music? Community Genetics, 9(3), 211-220.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/nocsi.v0i3.91146
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
_________________________________________
Journal «NOvation – Critical Studies of Innovation»
ISSN 2562-7147
BDP: https://revistas.ufpr.br/wp
E-mail: novation@ufpr.br
The content of this journal is published under the following licence Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0
