Thought Experiment: An Innovation Pause
Posted on November 12, 2018Innovation and Inequality
Innovation, despite being an economic driver, is inherently also responsible for inequality. Innovation increases social and economic inequalities[1] whether that be in regards to (a) a developed[2] and developing country[3], and/or (b) an urban vs suburban centers. With recent rapid technological advancements, these inequalities seem to more and more apparent and as tech innovations begin to occur even more rapidly, these inequalities may also grow exponentially. And it is important to note that while tech innovation is absolutely capable of helping bridge the inequality gap, in a product and profit based economy, that seems to be an afterthought or bi-product and not the goal.
In addition to this rapid tech innovation, it is important to note who these innovations are currently being created by. And that is the wealthy. Recent tech advancements such as the internet and blockchain are all created by those with wealth and power. Majority of the time, created for their own benefit[4]. And hence, these advancements are subject to their conscious and subconscious biases[5]. They may or may not recognize the inequalities mentioned above and the privilege structures that go along with these inequalities.
The above mentioned issues are highly worrisome. I only see them making things worse for the underserved and unserved populations of our world.
What if we hit pause?
If we are to proceed with the stated thought process above, then we can conclude that things will only get much worse and the inequality gaps of society wider. Certain populations and communities of the world will continue to be excluded and will be left behind.
So, here’s a thought –
What if we were to hit pause on innovation for a bit? What if instead of continued growth and creation, we all focused on helping raise the bar for those in need?
What would our world look like if developing countries got time to catch up to the developed in terms of education and wealth? Could there be greater wealth in it for all?
For e.g., Instead of developing blockchain further, what if energy, time and funds were invested in ensuring that we get internet access for all underserved communities, countries and people first? Would blockchain actually stand a better chance at integrating itself into our healthcare, retail, corporate systems if underserved communities caught up to the knowledge, wealthy communities?
Could hitting pause help us to bridge the inequality gap quicker? Could innovation be more inclusive? Would it help us design and create more thoughtfully? Do we have more to gain by hitting pause than we have to lose?
It seems that a system must be in crisis, for it to change. Hitting pause could be such a crisis but a self-induced one. In hopes that pain today could result in greater gains later for all.
What does this all mean?
In regards to technological advancements, I have concluded the following – the hard work is helping underserved communities gain access and adopt new innovations. Implementation and staying with the mess seems to be the key here. Because really, if tech advancements only increase inequalities in society[6], what is even the point (beyond profit)?
Alongside inequality, I am pondering the notion of inclusion and exclusion. Inclusiveness should be the basis of both innovation and design. Anything created really should be inclusive. And, while models of inclusive innovation[7] and design[8] do exist, they are not widespread today. I believe we must be inclusive not just in ideation but also in creation and implementation. And, we can be more inclusive by tracking our exclusions and the reasons behind them. Whether that is exclusion of populations, thoughts and/or processes.
The issues stated above and my time in the seminar this semester, have begun to make me deeply think about my role as a designer. What is my responsibility? What should I consider as ethical practice? How do I focus on creation and adoption both? More specifically, how do I focus on both if majority of practice continues to occur in profit based consultancies?
And finally, in today’s world, why are we not expected to “fix/rework” the problems we create? Why do we think it is ok to walk away? When did it become ok?
ab.
References
[1] Aghion, P., Akcigit, U., Bergeaud, A., Blundell, R., & Hémous, D. 2015. Innovation and Top Income Inequality. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series. London: National Bureau of Economic Research.
[2] Stiglitz, J. E. 2012. The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future.New York: WW Norton & Company.
[3] Chataway, J., Hanlin, R., & Kaplinsky, R. 2014. Inclusive Innovation: An Architecture for Policy Development. Innovation and Development, 4(1): 33–54.
[4] Novak, Mikayla. 2018. The Implications of Blockchain for Income Inequality. RMIT University.
[5] Pragya, Agarwal. 2018. Here is Why Organisations Need to be Conscious of Unconscious Bias. https://www.forbes.com/sites/pragyaagarwaleurope/2018/08/26/here-is-why-organisations-need-to-be-conscious-of-unconscious-bias/#4be50fc9726. Accessed 12 Nov 2018.
[6] Stanford Poverty and Technology Lab. Technology based solutions that increase opportunity and reduce poverty. https://inequality.stanford.edu/stanford-technology-poverty-lab. Accessed 12 Nov 2018.
[7] Heeks, R., Amalia, M., Kintu, R., & Shah, N. 2013. Inclusive Innovation: Definition, Conceptualisation and Future Research Priorities. Working Paper No. 53. Manchester, UK: Centre of Development Informatics, Institute for Development Policy and Management.
[8] Holmes, Kat. 2018. What We’re Leaving Out of the Discussion Around Inclusive Design. https://eyeondesign.aiga.org/what-were-leaving-out-of-the-discussion-around-inclusive-design/. Accessed 12 Nov 2018.