Macroevolution of Technology
What determines the transition of a society from one level of development to another? One of the most fundamental causes is the global technological transformations. Among all major technological breakthroughs in history the most important are the three production revolutions: 1) the Agrarian Revolution; 2) the Industrial Revolution and 3) the Scientific-Information Revolution which will transform into the Cybernetic one.
The article introduces the Theory of Production Revolutions. This is a new explanatory paradigm which is of value when analyzing causes and trends of global shifts in historical process. The article describes the course of technological transformations in history and demonstrates a possible application
of the theory to explain the present and forthcoming technological changes. The authors argue that the third production revolution that started in the 1950s and which they call the Cybernetic one, in the coming decades, that is in the 2030s and 2040s, will get a new impetus and enter its final stage – the epoch
of (self)controllable systems. There are given certain forecasts concerning the development in such spheres as medicine, biotechnologies and nanotechnologies in the coming decades (the 2010s – 2060s).
The paper provides a number of proposed draft operational guidelines for technology measurement and includes a number of tentative technology definitions to be used for statistical purposes, principles for identification and classification of potentially growing technology areas, suggestions on the survey strategies and indicators. These are the key components of an internationally harmonized framework for collecting and interpreting technology data that would need to be further developed through a broader consultation process. A summary of definitions of technology already available in OECD manuals and the stocktaking results are provided in the Annex section.
On the Russian population opinion one of the most urgent ecology problems is the water pollution. By the data of Russian Federal Consumer Rights Protection and Human Health Control Service about 37% of the surface sources of centralized drinking water supply don`t meet sanitary norms and rules and 22% of Russian citizens do not have access to centralized water supply .
The study outlined three possible ways of overcoming above marked problems. The first method is based on the modern industrial-management scheme which is traditional for water provision in Russia. The second option suggests cleaning up sources of water intakes. The third way shows an option of varying treatment methods and technologies, depending on customer needs.
The Roadmap developed by Higher School of Economics and Rusnano indentified that nanotechnologies increase the efficiency and decrease energy consumption of traditional as well as innovation processes of water purification. In particular the perspective area of nanotechnology application is lies in the sphere of innovation sorbents and coagulants. Moreover nanotechnologies can also be used in baromembrane processes and membrane bioreactors.
Innovation technologies, processes and products implementation should be specific to individual regions and municipalities. This approach is based on the compliance of centralized and decentralized water supply, inlet and outlet water quality.
The Roadmap results are designed for the formation of government and regional policy on the pure water provision for population and industrial water treatment. Furthermore it indicates the most relevant business ideas and evaluates projects for nanotechnology and nanoproducts used in this field.
This collection offers the first comprehensive and definitive account of Martin Heidegger’s philosophy of technology. It does so through a detailed analysis of canonical texts and recently published primary sources on two crucial concepts in Heidegger’s later thought: Gelassenheit and Gestell. Gelassenheit, translated as ‘releasement’, and Gestell, often translated as ‘enframing’, stand as opposing ideas in Heidegger’s work whereby the meditative thinking of Gelassenheit counters the dangers of our technological framing of the world in Gestell. After opening with a scholarly overview of Heidegger’s philosophy of technology as a whole, this volume focuses on important Heideggerian critiques of science, technology, and modern industrialized society as well as Heidegger’s belief that transformations in our thought processes enable us to resist the restrictive domain of modern techno-scientific practice. Key themes discussed in this collection include: the history, development, and defining features of modern technology; the relationship between scientific theories and their technological instantiations; the nature of human agency and the essence of education in the age of technology; and the ethical, political, and environmental impact of our current techno-scientific customs. This volume also addresses the connection between Heidegger’s critique of technology and his involvement with the Nazis. Finally, and with contributions from a number of renowned Heidegger scholars, the original essays in this collection will be of great interest to students of Philosophy, Technology Studies, the History of Science, Critical Theory, Environmental Studies, Education, Sociology, and Political Theory.
In many organizations implementation of innovation is initiated by the management with application of so-cold “top-down” approach: strategic targets and key success factors with the initiatives of its achieving are formed and consolidated in different regulations, procedures, rules and instructions, which are brought to concrete employees later. The feedback from employees is occurred on the fact of initiative execution in form of corrective procedures locally, but the forming of innovation is still the top-management prerogative.
Such centric approach is mostly demotivating approach for initiative employees, who generate, implement and use innovation ideas. For this problem correction hybrid methods are used. The creation of special department inside the company is supposed to be done. It bears duties of innovation catalyst (usually R&D and HR departments have this role). Among other things this department is responsible for inspiration of average executive on development of innovation, determination and consolidation of corporate values and standards of behavior. In the end, the employees orientation on single corporate targets, the increase of corporate spirit would again “top-down” imposed and the department is just the retransmitter of values that are determined by the management.
How should the politics of relations between colleagues, clients and partners be naturally created and how to establish the awareness by the company employees of their personal responsibility and their personal role in corporate values realization, creation of innovation atmosphere inside the organization that does not resist the innovation? The approach, which is described in this article, supposes the forming of distributed network inside the organization with the transfer to it the general effort in the sphere of creating innovations and implementing the corporate ethics principals.
The article is based on the introductory part of the collection on “Material Culture and Technology in Everyday Life: Ethnographic Approaches” (2009). The author presents a brief review of concepts that have been lately employed in research on material or technological culture. He attempts to show that different disciplines do in fact use adjacent notions and concepts in thinking about materiality, and tries to delineate ways of bringing the different research traditions to a unified platform that could serve as a theoretical foundation for the complex materialistic study of technological culture.
For the development of technological innovations it is essential to ensure competent and modern commercialization within the framework of balanced business models. Multifactor cluster analysis of business models of contemporary high-technology companies and industries shows that the most effective commercialization emanate in the framework of four basic models. Company's profitability does not depend directly on the level of its technologies, but is determined by the quality of these business models. Besides trends in high-technology industries demonstrate raising segmentation and differentiation of markets and more frequent utilization of value network models.