home discussions general geek club technology justice

Technology justice

The fact that 1.1 billion people still lack access to clean water, yet the technology and knowledge to provide it is both available and affordable, is an injustice, We're leading a movement for change for technology justice and we'd like to hear your views.

Read more...

Comments

1 | 2 | 3 Most Recent
  • Reply

    David J. Grimshaw said:

    said:
    Also of relevance to this debate is the blog I have posted earlier today. Please visit our blog page.
    on 6/7/11
  • Reply

    Ellie Hopkins said:

    gemma said:
    "We now need technology justice as much as we need fairtrade" So said Practical Action's CEO last month (http://bit.ly/pocMWD). He went on to say that "the fact that 1.1 billion people in the world still lack access to clean water, when the technology and the knowledge necessary to provide them with it is both available and affordable, is not merely regrettable, it's an injustice." This month we're asking, what does 'technology justice' mean to you? Should technology justice become the new rallying cry around the world in the same way that fair trade did just a few years ago? How do you think Practical Action can contribute to that call?
    on 3/8/11
  • Reply

    Jonathan Minchin said:

    said:
    Technology in itself can be understood in many ways; as well as engineering solutions a technology may also be a method of expression, a traditional practice or symbol of political will. As with all technical solutions there is a choice to be had, and it is through this choice that the mechanisms for justice can be corrupted, decisions may be deprived or manipulated that ultimately leave people needlessly lacking. This raises further issues around equality and access to knowledge and also the freedom to choose ones' technology. Amartya Sen once noted that famines may not be caused simply by the lack of food but moreover by the unjust distribution of it; the inability of famine-prone individuals to access food in times of great need, even when food supplies are adequate. (Sen: Poverty and Famines. 1981) As technical solutions exist for many problems, scarcity is clearly not the issue here either, in a direct comparison to Sen; we may consider the distribution of practical solutions as unjust and go on to seek a more equitable technology transfer model. When we talk of Technology Justice we may consider our Technology rights in the same breath. These might include not merely the right to access technology but also the right to experiment and innovate also and the right to express traditions and creativity with it, the right to empower oneself with technology and the freedom to share and choose it. Injustices might be found in the traps of technological dependency cycles or the forced use of a particular solution. I feel that Practical Action has a leading role to take in the discourse and can lend tremendous weight and a voice to these issues. I am particularly interested in the move to bridge the global digital dived as a means to enhance access to needed technologies. In this context I ask what might be the ways that communications technologies and networks can help to transfer relevant solutions and how could they work by referencing the agency of the end user? I am currently working with distributed online networks as means of empowerment and capacity building, I advocate these to work alongside the knowledge base and experience of Practical Action and offer this as one possible path to explore.
    on 3/8/11
    • Reply

      Gemma Hume said:

      said:
      Jonathan, you pick up on a valid point on technology transfer, which we have touched on in previous discussions and is a path we are exploring. Thanks for your comments on what technology justice means to you. Thanks for picking up on technology rights, of course this is something we should be considering when we advocate for technology justice.
      on 3/8/11
    • Reply

      Margaret said:

      said:
      Jonathan, Great points. Really liked the comparison with Sens writing on food and the importance of distribution. Interested in distributed online networks - good if you could tell us more of your ideas for links with Practical Actions knowledge services.
      on 3/8/11
      • Reply

        Jonathan Minchin said:

        said:
        @ Margaret. Having read David Grimshaw's posts this morning it is great to see how PA is looking at generating a move toward more demand-led initiatives for technology transfer. I am currently working on a web system that allows for the increased connectedness of innovators through the enhancement of distributed regional nodes. This means that any innovator in a regional node is able to link to a choice of technical solutions through their own agency rather than through centralised routes. With the impetus of development firmly in the hands of the user-generator PA would then be uniquely situated to assume the regulator role in these distributed networks - in much the same way as there are regulators in any chat room. PA may then advise on the the development or implementation of a chosen technology rather than being forced into decision making.
        on 3/8/11
  • Reply

    Gemma Hume said:

    said:
    We've been getting some positive feedback on the term technology justice. On Linked In, we've been talking about how technology justice can include access to more consumer driven technologies. I'd be interested to hear what other people think.
    on 3/8/11
  • Reply

    DavidMc0 said:

    said:
    Like most people here, I'm passionate about using technology to help tackle poverty and improve the lives people all over the world. However, I'm unsure as to what the term 'technology justice' adds to this cause. Does it really help to talk about technology as an 'instrument of justice', rather than an enabler of practical solutions? I feel that the potential that technology offers to the fight against poverty is huge, and far more significant that FairTrade, but I'm not sure that 'technology justice' is the best label for a call to provide enabling technologies to those in need.
    on 3/8/11
    • Reply

      Ellie Hopkins said:

      said:
      That's a really interesting point David. We've been throwing around a few different names/terms here at Practical Action recently to try to describe what it is we want to achieve through our campaigns, our policy and advocacy work and through our on-the-ground work around the world. We'd love to hear your ideas for a heading that would better sum up what we (as Practical Action and as a group of like-minded people more widely) are working towards.
      on 3/8/11
      • Reply

        hiit said:

        said:
        Do you have a Facebook fan page for your site? Ron
        on 1/5/12

Replying...