Volume 5
Special Issue-Inquiring into Technoscience in India

The Socio-technical challenge between the two modes: how to engage Science and Technology Studies in a coherent Engineering practice?

PDF
  • Vivek Kant
Vivek Kant
1 floor, IDC Office, IDC School of Design, IIT Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400076

Published 2023-09-03

Keywords

  • Socio-technical system,
  • Social science,
  • STS,
  • technoscience

How to Cite

Kant, V. (2023). The Socio-technical challenge between the two modes: how to engage Science and Technology Studies in a coherent Engineering practice?. DIALOGUE: Science, Scientists and Society, 5, 1–17. Retrieved from https://dialogue.ias.ac.in/index.php/dialogue/article/view/59

Abstract

The change in Indian political and economic conditions has brought about a change in the outlooks of academic producers and consumers alike. There has been an increasing demand for transparency and equity in government-supported modes of activity, as well as, an increase in engineering and technological activity. Demand has grown in the sectors of engineering and design. The government has concomitantly set up manpower production avenues in the form of engineering institutes and the creation of a design spine in the current engineering curriculum. While this dominant wave has continued, there is a counter growth from other academic sectors, such as Science and Technology Studies (STS), that emphasizes that the crux of technoscientific activities need to be comprehended to make their end results just and equitable to society. Most notable in this line of research is the study of large-scale technical systems, socio-technical systems, by both historians and sociologists. While both the engineering and STS academic literature have continued to grow steadily in these large technological systems, there is still a need for integrating the insights of STS into core engineering practices for systems design in Indian technological development trajectories. This chapter aims to highlight that the dichotomy of the two modes of knowledge production, in terms of state-led top-down and actor-led bottom-up, does not fare well for socio-technical systems. Thus, there is a need for tighter integration between the existing modes of engineering activity with the new alternatives, such as STS, with the long-term view of comprehending the two waves, Post–Nehruvian VS. new technoscientific consensus, together rather than seeing them as alternatives.

PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. Thackara, J. 2017. How to Thrive in the Next Economy: Designing Tomorrow's World Today. London: Thames & Hudson.
  2. Chibber, V. 2003. Locked in Place: State-Building and Late Industrialization in India. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  3. Majumdar, S. K. 2012. India's Late, Late Industrial Revolution Democratizing Entrepreneurship. Cambridge University Press.
  4. Mukherjee, A. 1978. “Indian Capitalist Class and Congress on National Planning and Public Sector 1930-47.” Economic and Political Weekly 13(35):1516–28.
  5. Bhagwati, J. N. 1993. India in Transition: Jagdish Bhagwati. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  6. Subramanian, D. 2010. Telecommunications Industry in India: State, Business and Labour in a Global Economy. New Delhi: Social Science Press.
  7. Vermaas, P. E. 2011. A Philosophy of Technology: From Technical Artefacts to Socio-technical Systems. San Rafael, Calif.: Morgan & Claypool.
  8. Hughes, T. P. 1988. Networks of Power. Electrification in Westers Society, 1880-1930. Baltimore- London: Johns Hopkins.
  9. Hughes, T. P. 1998. Rescuing Prometheus: Four Monumental Projects That Changed Our World. New York: Pantheon.
  10. Trist, E. 1981. “The Evolution of Socio-Technical Systems.” Occasional paper 2(1981):1981.
  11. Trist, E., Murray, H. and Trist, B. 1993. The Social Engagement of Social Science, a Tavistock Anthology, Volume 2: the Socio-Technical Perspective. University of Pennsylvania Press.
  12. ISE. n.d. “Growth of Ergonomics in India.” Retrieved October 3, 2020 (https:// www.ise.org.in/ fountainhead.shtml).
  13. Rasmussen, J. 1997. “Risk Management in a Dynamic Society: a Modelling Problem.” Safety Science 27(2-3):183–213.
  14. Bucciarelli, L. L. 1988. “An Ethnographic Perspective on Engineering Design.” Design Studies 9(3):159–68.
  15. Bucciarelli, L. L. 2002a. “Between Thought and Object in Engineering Design.” Design Studies 23(3):219–31.
  16. Bucciarelli, L. L. 2002b. Designing Engineers. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  17. Henderson, K. 1999. On Line and on Paper: Visual Representations, Visual Culture, and Computer Graphics in Design Engineering. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  18. Vinck, D., Ed. 2003. Everyday Engineering: an Ethnography of Design and Innovation. Cam., MA: MIT Press.
  19. Downey, Gary L., Donovan, A. and Elliott, T. J. 1989. “The Invisible Engineer: How Engineering Ceased to Be a Problem in Science and Technology Studies.” Knowledge and Society 8(1989):189–216.
  20. Downey, G. L. and Zhang, Z. 2015. “Nonlinear STS, Engineering Studies, and Dominant Images of Engineering Formation: an Interview with Professor Gary Downey.” J. Eng. Stud. 7:332–48.
  21. Bensaude-Vincent, B., Loeve, S., Nordmann, A., & Schwarz, A. (2011). Matters of interest: The objects of research in science and technoscience. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 42 (2), 365–383.
  22. Nordmann, A., Bensaude-Vincent, B., Loeve, S., & Schwarz, A. (2011). Science vs. Technoscience: a primer. Retrieved from https:// www.philosophie.tu-darmstadt.de/ media/ philosophie___goto/ text_1/ Primer_Science-Technoscience.pdf
  23. Kant, V., and Kerr, E. 2019. Taking Stock of Engineering Epistemology: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Philosophy & Technology, 32 (4), 685–726.
  24. Prasad, A. 2014. Imperial Technoscience: Transnational Histories of MRI in the United States, Britain, and India. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  25. Greenwood, J. D. 2003. The Disappearance of the Social in American Social Psychology. Cambridge University Press.
  26. Marx, L. 2010. “Technology: The Emergence of a Hazardous Concept.” Technology and Culture 51 (3): 561–77.
  27. Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P. and Pinch, T. J. 2012. The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. Anniversary Edition. MIT press.
  28. Fortun, K. 2009. Advocacy after Bhopal: Environmentalism, Disaster, New Global Orders. University of Chicago Press.