Decolonizing technology assessment: Towards a radical transformation of the modern world

Saurabh Arora; Barbara Van Dyck

doi:10.14512/tatup.7166

Authors

Saurabh Arora Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex, Brighton (GB) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8836-6821 s.arora@sussex.ac.uk
Barbara Van Dyck Agroecology Lab, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels (BE) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6746-6193 barbara.van.dyck@ulb.be

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14512/tatup.7166

Keywords:

sustainable development, colonial modernity, radical care, pluriversal flourishing, agricultural sustainability

Abstract

This research article makes a conceptual contribution to decolonizing technology assessment (TA) by highlighting the persistence of colonial relations, not only between nations but also between different ways of knowing and being. Beyond the modern, these ways are often categorized as Indigenous, traditional, vernacular, artisanal and local. Against many such ways, the modern world has enacted colonial relations of superiority and supremacy, control and domination, as well as extraction and appropriation. To help transform these globally extensive relations, we call to decolonize TA through radical care for the social-material bases of colonially marginalized ways of being and knowing. This means that TA should enable refusals of modern innovations if they are likely to damage those social-material bases. Furthermore, radical care in TA means practicing solidarity with decolonial movements that directly confront entrenched colonial relations behind modern concentrations of power and privilege. We support our arguments with brief examples from agriculture.

References

Ahmed, Shamila (2024): Insitutional racism. Colonialism, epistemic injustice and cumulative trauma. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003187073 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003187073

Ajwang, Fredrick; Arora, Saurabh; Atela, Joanes; Onyango, Joel; Kyari, Mohammad (2023): Enabling modernisation, marginalising alternatives? Kenya’s agricultural policy and smallholders. In: Journal of International Development 35 (1), pp. 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.3660 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.3660

Arora, Saurabh; Stirling, Andy (2023): Colonial modernity and sustainability transitions. A conceptualisation in six dimensions. In: Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 48, p. 100733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2023.100733 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2023.100733

Arora, Saurabh; Van Dyck, Barbara (2021): Refusal as radical care? Moving beyond modern industrial agriculture. In: Development 64 (3–4), pp. 252–258. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41301-021-00310-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41301-021-00310-3

Arora, Saurabh; Van Dyck, Barbara; Sharma, Divya; Stirling, Andy (2020): Control, care, and conviviality in the politics of technology for sustainability. In: Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy 16 (1), pp. 247–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2020.1816687 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2020.1816687

Baker, Mahina-a-rangi (2012): The Korowai Framework. Assessing GE through tribal values. In: New Genetics and Society 31, pp. 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2011.597984 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2011.597984

Balanzó-Guzmán, Alejandro; Ramos-Mejía, Mónica (2023): Towards epistemic diversity in sustainability transitions. An exploration of hybrid socio-technical systems. In: Sustainability Science 18 (6), pp. 2511–2531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-023-01370-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-023-01370-9

Beck, Ulrich (1992): Risk Society. Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.

Callon, Michel; Lascoumes, Pierre; Barthe, Yannick (2009): Acting in an uncertain world. An essay on technical democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Cadena, Marisol de la; Blaser, Mario (2018): A world of many worlds. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781478004318 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781478004318

Delvenne, Pierre (2017): Responsible research and innovation as a travesty of technology assessment? In: Journal of Responsible Innovation 4 (2), pp. 278–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1328653 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1328653

Domingues, Gabriel; Sauer, Sérgio (2023): Amazonian socio-environmental frontier. Struggles, resistance and contradictions in confronting the agrarian extractive frontier. In: Third World Quarterly 44 (10), pp. 2208–2226. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2022.2124965 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2022.2124965

Escobar, Arturo (2020): Pluriversal politics. The real and the possible. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781478012108 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781478012108

Gaonkar, Dilip (2001): Alternative modernities. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Ghosh, Bipashyee; Arora, Saurabh (2022): Smart as (un)democratic? The making of a smart city imaginary in Kolkata, India. In: Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space 40 (1), pp. 318–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/23996544211027583 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/23996544211027583

Gómez-Barris, Macarena (2017): The extractive zone. Social ecologies and decolonial perspectives. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1220n3w DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1220n3w

Gremmen, Bart (2023): Ethical issues of developing new technologies in agriculture. In: Robert Zimdahl (ed.): Burleigh Dodds series in agricultural science. Sawston: Burleigh Dodds, pp. 191–210. https://doi.org/10.19103/AS.2023.0125.12 DOI: https://doi.org/10.19103/AS.2023.0125.12

Grunwald, Armin (2019): Technology assessment in practice and theory. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429442643 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429442643

Gupta, Clare (2015): Return to freedom. Anti-gmo aloha ‘āina activism on molokai as an expression of place-based food sovereignty. In: Globalizations 12 (4), pp. 529–544. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2014.957586 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2014.957586

Hackfort, Sarah; Marquis, Sarah; Bronson, Kelly (2024): Harvesting value. Corporate strategies of data assetization in agriculture and their socio-ecological implications. In: Big Data & Society 11 (1), p. 20539517241234279. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517241234279 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517241234279

Hackfort, Sarah; Saave, Anna (2024): Toward a caring and (re) productive bioeconomy? A feminist analysis of socio-technical innovations and sustainability shortcomings. In: Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy 20 (1), p. 2375808. https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2024.2375808 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2024.2375808

Harremoes, Poul et al. (2001): Late lessons from early warnings. The precautionary principle 1896–2000. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.

Hennen, Leonhard (1999): Participatory technology assessment. A response to technical modernity? In: Science and Public Policy 26 (5), pp. 303–312. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154399781782310 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3152/147154399781782310

Hennen, Leonhard; Hahn, Julia; Ladikas, Miltos; Lindner, Ralf; Peissl, Walter; van Est, Rinie (eds.) (2023): Technology assessment in a globalized world. Facing the challenges of transnational technology governance. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10617-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10617-0

Hobart, Hi ’ilei; Kneese, Tamara (2020): Radical care. Survival strategies for uncertain times. In: Social Text 38 (1), pp. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1215/01642472-7971067 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/01642472-7971067

Jimenez, Andrea; Delgado, Deborah; Merino, Roger; Argumedo, Alejandro (2022): A decolonial approach to innovation? Building paths towards buen vivir. In: The Journal of Development Studies 58 (9), pp. 1633–1650. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2022.2043281 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2022.2043281

Kröger, Markus (2021): Extractivisms, existences, and extinctions. Monoculture plantations and Amazon deforestation. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003102977 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003102977

Ludwig, David; Macnaghten, Phil (2020): Traditional ecological knowledge in innovation governance. A framework for responsible and just innovation. In: Journal of Responsible Innovation 7 (1), pp. 26–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2019.1676686 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2019.1676686

Lugones, María (2007): Heterosexualism and the colonial/modern gender system. In: Hypatia (1), pp. 186–209.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2007.tb01156.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/hyp.2006.0067

MacGregor, Sherilyn (2004): From care to citizenship. Calling ecofeminism back to politics. In: Ethics and the Environment 9 (1), pp. 56–84. https://doi.org/10.1353/een.2004.0007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/een.2004.0007

Maderson, Siobhan (2023): Co-producing agricultural policy with beekeepers. Obstacles and opportunities. In: Land Use Policy 128, p. 106603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106603 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106603

Maienfisch, Peter; Koerber, Karsten (2024): Recent innovations in crop protection research. Pest Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.8441 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.8441

Mamdani, Mahmood (2020): Neither settler nor native. The making and unmaking of permanent minorities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674249998 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674249998

Martin, Aryn; Myers, Natascha; Viseu, Ana (2015): The politics of care in technoscience. In: Social Studies of Science 45 (5), pp. 625–641. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312715602073 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312715602073

Montenegro de Wit, Maywa (2016): Are we losing diversity? Navigating ecological, political, and epistemic dimensions of agrobiodiversity conservation. In: Agriculture and Human Values 33 (3), pp. 625–640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-015-9642-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-015-9642-7

Oyěwùmí, Oyèrónké (1997): The invention of women. Making an African sense of western gender discourses. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Patel, Raj; Moore, Jason (2017): A history of the world in seven cheap things. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.

Portocarrero Lacayo, Ana (2024): Care is the new radical. Food and climate approaches from a peasant feminist perspective. In: The Journal of Peasant Studies 51 (6), pp. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2024.2306987 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2024.2306987

Quijano, Aníbal (2000): Coloniality of power, eurocentrism, and Latin America. In: Nepantla: Views from the South 1 (3), pp. 533–580. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580900015002005

Quijano, Aníbal (2007): Coloniality and modernity/rationality. In: Cultural Studies 21 (2–3), pp. 168–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601164353 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601164353

Schneider, Lindsey (2022): Fish of the future. Genetically engineered salmon and settler colonial science. In: The American Indian Quarterly 46 (3), pp. 225–259. https://doi.org/10.1353/aiq.2022.0013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/aiq.2022.0013

Schot, Johan; Rip, Arie (1997): The past and future of constructive technology assessment. In: Technological Forecasting and Social Change 54 (2–3), pp. 251–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1625(96)00180-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1625(96)00180-1

Stilgoe, Jack; Owen, Richard; Macnaghten, Phil (2013): Developing a framework for responsible innovation. In: Research Policy 42 (9), pp. 1568–1580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008

Stirling, Andy (2008): ‘Opening up’ and ‘closing down’. Power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. In: Science, Technology, & Human Values 33 (2), pp. 262–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243907311265 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243907311265

Stirling, Andy (2014): Towards innovation democracy? Participation, responsibility and precaution in innovation governance. In: SSRN Electronic Journal 24. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2743136 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2743136

Stirling, Andy (2024): Responsibility and the hidden politics of directionality. Opening up ‘innovation democracies’ for sustainability transformations. In: Journal of Responsible Innovation 11 (1), 2370082. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2024.2370082 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2024.2370082

Sultana, Farhana (2022): Resplendent care-full climate revolutions. In: Political Geography 99, p. 102785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2022.102785 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2022.102785

Van Dyck, Barbara; Kenis, Anneleen; Stirling, Andy (2022): The genetically modified organism shall not be refused? Talking back to the technosciences. In: Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space 5 (3), pp. 1230–1251. https://doi.org/10.1177/25148486211042307 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/25148486211042307

Van Lente, Harro; Swierstra, Tsjalling; Joly, Pierre-Benoît (2017): Responsible innovation as a critique of technology assessment. In: Journal of Responsible Innovation 4 (2), pp. 254–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1326261 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1326261

Weeks, Kathi (2011): The problem with work. Feminism, Marxism, antiwork politics, and postwork imaginaries. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822394723 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822394723

West, Paige; Igoe, James; Brockington, Dan (2006): Parks and peoples. The social impact of protected areas. In: Annual Review of Anthropology 35 (1), pp. 251–277. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.35.081705.123308 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.35.081705.123308

Whittingham, Jennifer; Wynberg, Rachel (2021): Is the feminist ethics of care framework a useful lens for GM crop risk appraisal in the global south? In: Technology in Society 64, p. 101455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101455 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101455

Whittingham, Jennifer; Marshak, Maya; Swanby, Haidee (2024) Unsettling modernist scientific ontologies in the regulation of genetically modified crops in South Africa. In: Rachel Wynberg (ed.): African perspectives on agroecology. Why farmer-led seed and knowledge systems matter. Rugby: Practical Action Publishing, pp. 237–271. https://doi.org/10.3362/9781780447445 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3362/9781780447445

Wickson, Fern et al. (2017): Addressing socio-economic and ethical considerations in biotechnology governance. The potential of a new politics of care. In: Food Ethics 1 (2), pp. 193–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-017-0014-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-017-0014-4

Wynne, Brian (1992): Uncertainty and environmental learning. Reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm. In: Global Environmental Change 2 (2), pp. 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-3780(92)90017-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-3780(92)90017-2