Paradigmas transformadores para una sociología comprometida: El caso de las políticas de innovación

  1. Giachi, Sandro 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Cádiz

    Universidad de Cádiz

    Cádiz, España


RESED: Revista de estudios socioeducativos

ISSN: 2341-3255

Year of publication: 2023

Issue Title: Teoría crítica y marxismo en las ciencias sociales y humanas: alcances, limitaciones y reconfiguraciones. Sociología Transformadora

Issue: 11

Type: Article

DOI: 10.25267/REV_ESTUD_SOCIOEDUCATIVOS.2023.I11.21 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: RESED: Revista de estudios socioeducativos

Sustainable development goals


Sociology has shown that innovations can generate both positive and negative social impacts. However, in mainstream institutional discourse we often found an acritical and generically optimistic take on the role of innovation for socio-economic development. In this paper we argue that shifting the paradigm around the concept of innovation - taking into account its implications for public policy – is a fruitful approach for a sociology engaged in social transformation. In particular, we present the concept of "transformative innovation" which derives from a different paradigm for innovation policy and which builds on some recent developments in sociological theory on technological change, such as transitions theory and the multilevel perspective. We illustrate the practical implications of this paradigm through the presentation of a cross-sector action research project carried out in over six countries, the Transformative Innovation Policy Consortium. Finally, we discuss the results of three innovative experiences in the field of education, showing how the transformative paradigm provides concepts and strategies that can contribute to a radical and inclusive transformation of socio-technical systems.

Bibliographic References

  • Arjona, R., & Ravet, J. (2021). Ciencia e innovación para transformar Europa. Papeles de Economía Española, (169), 2-15.
  • Ayisi, J., Ndakala, F., Owuor, R., Nyanga, R., Daniels, C., Wanyama, B.& Ting, B. (2019). Nomadic education in Kenya: a case study of mobile schools in Samburu County, as a transformative innovation policy. TIPC Transformative Innovation Learning History.
  • Berardi, F. (2017). Futurability: the age of impotence and the horizon of possibility. Londres: Verso Books.
  • Borrás, S., & Edler, J. (2020). The roles of the state in the governance of socio-technical systems’ transformation. Research Policy, 49(5), 103971.
  • Cantwell, J. (2005). Innovation and Competitiveness. En J. Fagerberg, D.C. Mowery & R.R. Nelson (ed) The Oxford handbook of innovation (543-567). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Chataway, J., Chux, D., Kanger, L., Ramirez, M., Schot, J., & Steinmueller, E. (2017). Developing and enacting transformative innovation policy. 8th International Sustainability Transitions Conference, Goteburgo, Suecia, 18-21 de junio.
  • Cozzens, S.E. & Kaplinsky, R. (2010). Innovation, Poverty, and Inequality: Cause, Consequence, or Co-evolution? En B.-Å. Lundvall, K. Joseph, C. Chaminade & J. Vang (ed) Handbook on Innovation Systems and Developing Countries: Building Domestic Capabilities in a Global Setting (57-82). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  • Cozzens, S. & Takhur, D. (2014). Innovation and Inequality: Emerging Technologies in an Unequal World. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  • Daniels, C. (2019). Transformative Innovation Policy Africa Hub Exploratory. TIPC Technical Report.
  • Edler, J., & Boon, W.P. (2018). The next generation of innovation policy: Directionality and the role of demand-oriented instruments’—Introduction to the special section. Science and Public Policy, 45(4), 433-434.
  • Fatou, C., Joseph, D., Lawson Assion, M. S., Daniels, C., & Ting, B. (2019). ICT in Higher Education in Africa: Example of the Virtual University in Senegal. TIPC Transfomarive Innovation Learning History.
  • Fernández Esquinas, M. (2020). Innovación: Una perspectiva sociológica. RES. Revista Española de Sociología, 29(3), 5-37.
  • Fukuyama, F. (1992). The End of History and the Last Man. Nueva York: Penguin.
  • Geels, F.W. (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research policy, 31(8-9), 1257-1274.
  • 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.
  • Geels, F.W., & Schot, J. (2007). Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Research Policy, 36(3), 399–417.
  • Ghosh, B., Kivimaa, P., Ramirez, M., Schot, J., & Torrens, J. (2021). Transformative outcomes: assessing and reorienting experimentation with transformative innovation policy. Science and Public Policy, 48(5), 739-756.
  • Giachi, S. (2019). Transformando las prácticas de evaluación en las agencias de innovación para fomentar transiciones hacia la sostenibilidad. Arxius de sociologia, (40), 21-30.
  • Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Gilman, N. (2018). Modernization theory never dies. History of Political Economy, 50(S1), 133-151.
  • Godin, B. (2015). Innovation contested: The idea of innovation over the centuries. Nueva York: Routledge.
  • Godin, B. & Vinck, D. (2016). Critical Studies of Innovation. Alternative Approaches to the Pro-innovation Bias. Cheltelham: Edward Elgar.
  • González García, M.I., Luján López, J.L., & López Cerezo, J.A. (1996). Ciencia, tecnología y sociedad: una introducción al estudio social de la ciencia y la tecnología. Madrid: Tecnos.
  • Greaves, H., & MacAskill, W. (2019). The case for strong longtermism. Global Priorities Institute, 5.
  • Grin, J., Rotmans, J., Schot, J.W., Geels, F.W., & Loorbach, D. (2010). Transitions to sustainable development: new directions in the study of long term transformative change (Routledge studies in sustainability transitions; Vol. 1). Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
  • Hevia Martínez, G. (2019). La sociedad como artefacto: Sistemas sociotécnicos, sociotecnologías y sociotécnicas. CTS: Revista iberoamericana de ciencia, tecnología y sociedad, 14(40), 267-295.
  • Kanger, L., Geels, F.W., Sovacool, B., & Schot, J. (2019). Technological diffusion as a process of societal embedding: Lessons from historical automobile transitions for future electric mobility. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 71, 47-66.
  • Kanger, L., & Schot, J. (2019). Deep transitions: Theorizing the long-term patterns of socio-technical change. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 32, 7-21.
  • Kemp, R., Schot, J. & Hoogma, R. (1998). Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation: the approach of strategic niche management. Technology analysis & strategic management, 10(2), 175-198.
  • Molas-Gallart, J., Boni, A., Giachi, S., & Schot, J. (2021). A formative approach to the evaluation of Transformative Innovation Policies. Research Evaluation, 30(4), 431-442.
  • Molas-Gallart, J. y Davies, A. (2006). Toward theory-led evaluation: The experience of European science, technology, and innovation policies. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(1), 64-82.
  • Molina-Luque, F. (2021). El nuevo contrato social entre generaciones: elogio de la profiguración. Madrid: Catarata.
  • Røpke, I. (2012). The unsustainable directionality of innovation–The example of the broadband transition. Research Policy, 41(9), 1631-1642.
  • Saijo, T. (2020). Future design: Bequeathing sustainable natural environments and sustainable societies to future generations. Sustainability, 12(16), 6467.
  • Schot, J., Boni, A, Ramirez, M.S. & Steward, F. (2018). Addressing the sustainable development goals through transformative innovation policy. Tipc Research Brief, 1.
  • Schot, J., Daniels, C., Torrens, J., & Bloomfield, G. (2017). Developing a shared understanding of transformative innovation policy. TIPC Research Brief, 1.
  • Schot, J., & Kanger, L. (2018). Deep transitions: Emergence, acceleration, stabilization and directionality. Research Policy, 47(6), 1045-1059.
  • Schot, J., & Rip, A. (1997). The past and future of constructive technology assessment. Technological forecasting and social change, 54(2-3), 251-268.
  • Schot, J., & Steinmueller, W.E. (2018). Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change. Research policy, 47(9), 1554-1567.
  • Sirera Miralles, C. (2015). Neglecting the 19th century: Democracy, the consensus trap and modernization theory in Spain. History of the Human Sciences, 28(3), 51-67.
  • 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.
  • Weiss, C.H. (1997). How Can Theory-Based Evaluation Make Greater Headway. Evaluation Review, 21(4), 501-524.
  • Zapf, W. (1991). The role of innovations in modernization theory. International Review of Sociology, 2(3), 83-94.