¹ú²úÄÚÉä

Why is so much of our futures thinking dominated by technology, and why is that problematic for progressive futures?

Contrary to popular conceptions, futures are not determined by technologies. It is power over social choices in technology that shapes the future, and which is problematically concentrated amongst interests for whom the appearance of technology determinism is convenient. Drawing on Sussex research, Adrian and Andy argue futures thinking must therefore more actively persist in opening up and democratising social choices in technology.

They point to useful theoretical resources, diverse methods, and tools for 'looseing the grip of technological determinism in futures thinking':

• Interrogating and revealing the interests and power involved in technological development
• Exploring and supporting more diverse technological pathways that embody more plural economic and political values and assumptions
• Highlight a wider range of contrasting social and ecological possibilities
• Acknowledge the inevitable uncertainties and introduce humility and precaution into the social control of technology
• Facilitate greater participation and democracy into the social choices about technology that shape our futures

They argue that one of the most positively transformational things that governments, businesses and civil society can therefore do today is to loosen this grip of prevailing interests around science, technology and innovation masquerading behind popular myths about technological determinism. This involves a more practical approach to precaution in face of unavoidable uncertainties, building diverse ecologies of public participation, and embracing the inherently political nature of innovation. At a time when these qualities are so much under threat, it is in such ways that futures activities can open up more democratic and robust social choices about technology.

.

About the authors:

.

.