مبانی و نظریه‌های سیاست‌گذاری برای مدیریت گذارهای فناورانه

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار دانشکده مدیریت، دانشگاه تهران

2 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت فناوری، دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

گذارهای فناورانه تحولاتی هستند که علاوه بر تغییرات فنی؛ ابعاد اجتماعی، فرهنگی، زیرساختی و نهادی را نیز دربر‌می‌گیرند زیرا فناوری‌های بالغ با تمام ابعاد فوق در‌آمیخته و نظام‌های ‌اجتماعی-فنی  را در وضعیت قفل‌شدگی قرار می‌دهند. گذار به معنی خارج شدن از وضعیت قفل‌شدگی است و بنابراین سیاست‌گذاری برای حکمرانی و مدیریت چنین گذارهایی مستلزم توجه به همه این ابعاد برای غلبه بر خصوصیت وابستگی به مسیر نظام‌ها به سمتی است که اهداف مطلوب اجتماع را برآورده سازد. بدیهی است هر چه گذارها از خصوصیت نوآیندی فاصله بگیرند (مثل اغلب گذارهایی که به سمت اهدافی پایدار برنامه‌ریزی می‌شوند) سیاست‌گذاری برای غلبه بر قفل‌شدگی نظام‌های اجتماعی­-فنی هم مشکل‌تر خواهد بود. برای توضیح نحوه وقوع گذارها و همچنین سیاست‌گذاری برای حکمرانی آنها، رویکردهای مختلفی مانند رویکرد چندسطحی، مدیریت راهبردی کُنام‌های فناورانه و مدیریت گذار معرفی شده‌اند که در این مقاله در خصوص آنها بحث می‌شود. در نهایت نیز یک نمونه تجربه سیاستی از بکارگیری رویکرد مدیریت راهبردی کُنام‌های فناورانه در کشور معرفی شده است.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Policy Making for Governance of Technology Transitions: Basics and Theories

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fatemeh Saghafi 1
  • Mandana Azadegan-Mehr 2
1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Iran
2 Ph.D Candidate, Faculty of Management University of Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Technology transitions are fundamental shifts in sociotechnical systems, it means that they are not simply technical changes, but also changes in social, cultural, infrastructural and institutional dimensions. Since mature technologies are integrated with all these dimensions, sociotechnical systems are usually locked in, and their ruling regimes are resistant to change. Transition means getting out of "lock in" situation, so policy makers for governing such transitions needs to pay attention to all these aspects to overcome path dependency and to lead sociotechnical systems in a way that meet desirable goals of society. Different approaches are suggested in policy making in the field of technology transition, such as multi-level perspective, technological innovation systems and strategic niche management and transition management explained in paper and an example of using strategic niche management in Iran is provided.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Socio-Technical System
  • Socio-Technical Regime
  • Technological Transition
  • Multi-Level Perspective
  • Strategic Niche Management
  • Transition Management
[1] Safarzyńska, K., & van den Bergh, J. C. (2010). Demand-supply coevolution with multiple increasing returns: Policy analysis for unlocking and system transitions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(2), 297-317.
[2] Rip, A., & Kemp, R. (1998). Technological change. In: Rayner, S., & Malone, E. L. (Eds.). Human Choice and Climate Change: An International Assessment, pp. 327-401. BattellePress Columbus.
[3] Geels, F. W. (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research policy, 31(8), 1257-1274.
[4] Geels, F. W. (2005). Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective. Technological forecasting and social change, 72(6), 681-696.
[5] Faghihi, M. & Memarzadeh, G. (2014). E-Government as a Socio-Technical System: Typology of E-government Implementation. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 6(4), 1-13. {In Persian}.
[6] Geels, F. W. (2004). From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Research policy, 33(6-7), 897-920.
[7] Kanger, L., & Schot, J. (2018). Deep transitions: Theorizing the long-term patterns of socio-technical change. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions.
[8] Genus, A., & Coles, A. M. (2008). Rethinking the multi-level perspective of technological transitions. Research policy, 37(9), 1436-1445.
[9] Markard, J., Raven, R., & Truffer, B. (2012). Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects. Research policy, 41(6), 955-967.
[10] Rotmans, J., Kemp, R., & Van Asselt, M. (2001). More evolution than revolution: transition management in public policy. foresight, 3(1), 15-31.
[11] Ghosh, B., & Schot, J. (2019). Towards a novel regime change framework: Studying mobility transitions in public transport regimes in an Indian megacity. Energy Research & Social Science, 51, 82-95.
[12] Raven, R., Van den Bosch, S., & Weterings, R. (2010). Transitions and strategic niche management: towards a competence kit for practitioners. International Journal of Technology Management, 51(1), 57-74.
[13] Geels, F. W. (2011). The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. Environmental innovation and societal transitions, 1(1), 24-40.
[14] Markard, J., & Truffer, B. (2008). Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework. Research policy, 37(4), 596-615.
[15] Markard, J. (2017). Sustainability Transitions: Exploring the emerging research field and its contribution to management studies. In 33rd EGOS Colloquium, Copenhagen.
[16] Smith, A., Stirling, A., & Berkhout, F. (2005). The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions. Research Policy, 34, 1491-1510.
[17] Markard, J. (2018). The life cycle of technological innovation systems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change.
[18] Köhler, J., Geels, F. W., Kern, F., Markard, J., Onsongo, E., Wieczorek, A., ... & Fünfschilling, L. (2019). An agenda for sustainability transitions research: State of the art and future directions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions.
[19] Smith, A., Voß, J. P., & Grin, J. (2010). Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges. Research policy, 39(4), 435-448.
[20] Berkhout, F., Smith, A., & Stirling, A. (2004). Socio-technological regimes and transition contexts. System innovation and the transition to sustainability: theory, evidence and policy, 44(106), 48-75.
[21] Geels, F. W., & Schot, J. (2007). Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Research policy, 36(3), 399-417.
[22] Walrave, B., & Raven, R. (2016). Modelling the dynamics of technological innovation systems. Research policy, 45(9), 1833-1844.
[23] Hoogma, R. (2002). Experimenting for sustainable transport: the approach of strategic niche management. Taylor & Francis.
[24] Schot, J., & Geels, F. W. (2008). Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy. Technology analysis & strategic management, 20(5), 537-554.
[25] Loorbach, D. (2010). Transition management for sustainable development: a prescriptive, complexity based governance framework. Governance, 23(1), 161-18.
[26] Nill, J., & Kemp, R. (2009). Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies: From niche to paradigm. Research policy, 38(4), 668-680.
[27] Markard, J., Hekkert, M., & Jacobsson, S. (2015). The technological innovation systems framework: Response to six criticisms. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 16, 76-86.
[28] Weber, K. M., & Rohracher, H. (2012). Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change: Combining insights from innovation systems and multi-level perspective in a comprehensive ‘failures’ framework. Research Policy, 41(6), 1037-1047.
[29] Castilla-Rubio, J. C., Zadek, S., & Robins, N. (2016). FinTech and sustainable development: Assessing the implications. [online]. Geneva: UNEP.
[30] Blakstad, S., & Allen, R. (2018). Green Fintech. In FinTech Revolution (pp. 183-199). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
[31] Saghafi, F., Moghaddam, E. N., & Aslani, A. (2017). Examining effective factors in initial acceptance of high-tech localized technologies: Xamin, Iranian localized operating system. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 122, 275-288.
[32] Hoseini, M., Saghafi, F., & Aghayi, E. (2019). A multidimensional model of knowledge sharing behavior in mobile social networks. Kybernetes, 48(5), 906-929.