![Sample our Global Development journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5929/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Global-Development.jpg"})
Abstract
This essay revisits the historical development of a concept – tecnologia social – as one avenue for discussing alternatives to post-development, arguing that the Western-based historical path of technology development is one of the main sources of growing human impoverishment, social inequalities and economic dependency. The concept of tecnologia social points towards political processes that create opportunities to redefine the arrangements among social groups, artefacts and methods used in everyday life, particularly for production and consumption. Because the post-development debate has been criticised for formulating a sound and strong critique to mainstream development but failing to propose concrete empirical alternatives, we seek to foster the debate through the Latin American concept of tecnologia social.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Sonia Tello Rozas, Fabio Prado Saldanha and Natalie Mitev for their comments on previous versions of this manuscript, and David Himmelstein for the proof-editing.
Notes
1. This critical essay is neither a systematic literature review nor the result of specific empirical work. Indeed, the authors are qualitative researchers engaged with cultural and developmental issues that mobilised a combination of academic and practitioner documents to write this theoretical essay. We call this a critical essay, as it is concerned with putting forward a number of ideas and arguments sustained by bibliographical references and life experience.
2. We use ‘Western-based’, in line with Escobar, “Latin America at a Crossroads?,” to refer to the industrialised countries of Europe and North America. We could mobilise here other somehow equivalent terms, like the Euro-America dominant order, the North–South, or even the Global South/Global North. We prefer to keep the term Western-based, not to be simplistic or vague, but to seriously engage with the vocabulary of Escobar, Quijado and other Latin American thinkers.
3. Comaroff and Comaroff, “Theory from the South: A Rejoinder,” 2.
4. Dagnino, Brandão, and Novaes, “Sobre o Marco Analítico-Conceitual.”
5. Thomas and Buch, Actos, Actores y Artefactos.
6. Escobar, Encountering Development.
7. Herrera, “Desarrollo, Medio Ambiente.”
8. Furtado, Subdesenvolvimento e estagnação.
9. A few exceptions, worthy of notice, are Miranda, Lopez, and Soares, “Social Technology Network: Paths for Sustainability”; Smith et al., Grassroots Innovation Movements; and Smith, Fressoli, and Thomas, “Grassroots Innovation Movements: Challenges and Contributions.”
10. Gomes, “Alter-Native Development.”
11. Lloyd et al., “Reframing Development through Collaboration,” 1089.
12. Henderson, “SCOPE of Social Technology.”
13. MacKenzie and Wajcman, Social Shaping of Technology.
14. Nelson and Sampat, “Making Sense of Institutions.”
15. Chataway et al., “Global Health Social Technologies.”
16. Jarrahi and Sawyer, “Theorizing on the Take-Up of Social Technologies.”
17. Alves and Pozzebon, “How to Resist Linguistic Domination.”
18. Escobar, “Latin America at a Crossroads?”
19. Thomas and Buch, Actos, Actores y Artefactos.
20. M. Santos, Por uma Outra Globalização.
21. Mintzberg, “A Note on that Dirty Word ‘Efficiency,’” 105.
22. Schumacher, Small Is Beautiful; Jecquier, Appropriate Technology: Problems and Promises; Dagnino, Brandão, and Novaes, “Sobre o Marco Analítico-Conceitual.”
23. Serreau, “Solutions Locales pour un Désordre Global.”
24. FBB, Tecnologia Social na Fundação Banco Do Brasil.
25. Ibid.
26. Dagnino, Brandão, and Novaes, “Sobre o Marco Analítico-Conceitual”; Thomas and Buch, Actos, Actores y Artefactos.
27. Herrera, “Los Determinantes Sociales”; Escobar, “Latin America at a Crossroads?”
28. Novaes and Dias, “Contribuições ao Marco Analítico-Conceitual.”
29. Mumford, “Authoritarian and Democratic Technics”; Winner, “Upon Opening the Black Box”; Thomas, “Tecnologías para la Inclusión Social.”
30. Schumacher, Small Is Beautiful.
31. Fraga, “Autogestão e Tecnologia Social.”
32. Dickson, Alternative Technology and the Politics of Technical Change.
33. Schumacher, Small Is Beautiful; Jecquier, Appropriate Technology: Problems and Promises; Griffith, “CARICOM Countries and Appropriate Technology.”
34. Smith, “Alternative Technology Movement.”
35. Pack, “Políticas de Estímulo.”
36. Bourrières, “La Adaptación de la Tecnología”; Robinson, Tecnologías Apropiadas.
37. Darrow, Keller, and Palm, Appropriate Technology Sourcebook.
38. Thomas, “Tecnologías para la Inclusión Social.”
39. Dickson, Alternative Technology and the Politics of Technical Change.
40. Dagnino, Brandão, and Novaes, “Sobre o Marco Analítico-Conceitual.”
41. CEPAL, Comisión Económica para la América Latina y el Caribe.
42. Silveira, “Desenvolvimento Tecnológico no Brasil.”
43. Furtado, Subdesenvolvimento e estagnação; Furtado, O mito do desenvolvimento.
44. Silveira, “Desenvolvimento Tecnológico no Brasil.”
45. Furtado, O mito do desenvolvimento; Gurrieri, La obra de Prebisch.
46. Furtado, Subdesenvolvimento e estagnação.
47. Cardoso and Faletto, Dependencia y Desarrollo en America Latina; T. Santos, A teoria da dependência.
48. Oliveira, Crítica à Razão Dualista.
49. Núñez and Díaz, Amílcar Herrera y Celso Furtado.
50. Herrera et al., América Latina.
51. Herrera, “Desarrollo, Medio Ambiente.”
52. Meadows et al., The Limits of Growth.
53. Vaccarezza, “Ciência, Tecnologia e Sociedade”; Dias, “Um Tributo ao Pensamento.”
54. Green, “Latin America: Neoliberal Failure.”
55. Herrera, Transferencia de tecnología.
56. Ibid.
57. Herrera, “Los Determinantes Sociales.”
58. Fonseca and Serafim, “A Tecnologia Social.”
59. Thomas and Buch, Actos, Actores y Artefactos.
60. Feenberg, Transforming Technology.
61. Ibid.
62. Escobar, Encountering Development.
63. Rahnema and Bawtree, The Post-Development Reader; Escobar, “Latin America at a Crossroads?”; Escobar, Encountering Development.
64. Shaffer, “Post-Development and Poverty: An Assessment,” 1767.
65. Escobar, Encountering Development.
66. Esteva, “Development.”
67. Latouche, “De-Growth, Inequality and Poverty.”
68. Rahnema and Bawtree, The Post-Development Reader.
69. Rist, History of Development.
70. Sachs, The Development Dictionary.
71. Shiva, Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development.
72. Gomes, “Alter-Native Development.”
73. Sachs, The Development Dictionary, 3.
74. Gudynas, “Beyond Varieties of Development,” 725.
75. Strongman, “Postcolonialism and International Development Studies.”
76. Gudynas, “Beyond Varieties of Development.”
77. Escobar, Encountering Development.
78. Escobar, “Latin America at a Crossroads?”; Escobar, Encountering Development; Hart, “Indigenous Worldviews, Knowledge, and Research.”
79. Perera, “Engaged Universals and Community Economies”; Lloyd et al., “Reframing Development through Collaboration.”
80. Hart, “Indigenous Worldviews, Knowledge and Development”; Vanhulst and Beling, “Buen Vivir.”
81. Villalba, “Buen Vivir vs Development.”
82. Villalba, “Buen Vivir vs Development,” 1432.
83. RTS, Tecnologia Social e Desenvolvimento Sustentável.
84. Ibid.
85. Otterloo, Tecnologias Sociais.
86. Pena and Mello, “Tecnologia Social.”
87. Hess, Alternative Pathways in Science and Industry; Smith et al., Grassroots Innovation Movements; and Smith, Fressoli, and Thomas, “Grassroots Innovation Movements: Challenges and Contributions.”
88. Villalba, “Buen Vivir vs Development.”
89. B. S. Santos, Epistemologias do Sul.
90. Moulaert et al., International Handbook on Social Innovation.
91. Latouche, Decrecimiento y Post-Desarrollo.
92. Pieterse, “After Post-Development”; Andrews and Bawa, “A Post-Development Hoax?.”