The Alternative Technology Movement: an Analysis of Its Framing and Negotiation of Technology Development

Research in Human Ecology The Alternative Technology Movement: An Analysis of its Framing and Negotiation of Technology Development Adrian Smith SPRU — Science & Technology Policy Research Unit Freeman Centre University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9QE UK1 Abstract 2. Negotiating technology:The strategies pursued by activists and the compromises they face with actors im- Technology mediates our relations with one another and portant in technology development. with nature. Modern environmentalism recognised this from There are two literatures relevant to such issues: social its inception. Alternative Technology (AT) activists called for movement research and sociology of technology. At the most innovations that would pre-figure ecological society. This general level, it is social values that bind movements togeth- paper analyses AT advocacy of technology. Using the histo- er, and which they seek to promote in society. Meanwhile, ry of AT, two issues will be explored: 1) the relations between the sociology of technology identifies innovation as a funda- conceptualisations of environmental problems and the kinds mentally social process. As such, different social values per- of technology solution promoted; 2) the interplay and com- vade the development of technology. If social movements promises environmentalists must make with other actors im- and technology meet, it will be through the values that each portant in technological development. The paper concludes embodies. by reflecting upon how social actors advocate and construct Studies of social movements in relation to technology are technology. The AT experience highlights how technology- sparse. A few historical studies exist, e.g. Luddism (Thomp- fixes provide only temporary solutions to problems that are, son 1963), or the anti-nuclear movement (Rüdig 1990). As fundmentally, questions about prioritising multiple social with the narrower field of risk controversies, like agricultural values that are always shifting and developing. biotechnology, these are studies into technology resistance (Bauer 1995). What about movements more pro-active on Keywords: alternative technology, social movements, so- technology, such as AT activists? The work of Ron Eyerman ciology of technology and Andrew Jamison (1991) comes close. Their cognitive approach makes a general case for how environmentalism has Introduction contributed to greener knowledge production, with a con- comitant affect implied for technology (Jamison 2002). Technology mediates our relations with one another and Pursell (1993) has provided an overview of AT experience in with nature, for good and ill. In the 1970s, environmentalism the US. This paper provides a contribution in this vein. was tightly intertwined with a smaller Alternative Technolo- The approach taken is to develop an analysis by drawing gy (AT) movement. AT activists in a variety of industrialized upon themes in social movement research on the one hand, countries called for technologies that would facilitate the rad- and sociology of technology on the other. That analysis is ical transformation of industrial society: a transition to a split over the subsequent two sections of the paper. The first more ecologically harmonious, socially convivial, and eco- explores the AT conceptualisation of the environmental prob- nomically steady-state society (Jamison et al. 1990). Using lem, and how this worked to frame activists’ particular ap- the history of AT in the UK as a case study, this paper2 will proach to technology (framing technology). The second ana- explore two issues relevant to understanding the environmen- lytical section explores the strategies adopted by activists in tal movement and innovation: pursuit of AT (negotiating technology). Overall, the analysis 1. Framing technology:The relations between move- concludes by reflecting upon the way different social values ment conceptualisations of environmental problems become accommodated in prospective technology solutions and the kinds of technology solution promoted. that are important for their development. The paper con- 106 Human Ecology Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005 © Society for Human Ecology Smith cludes by considering whether the experience of social move- wave of environmental concern over the impacts of industri- ment engagement in technology stresses the limits of techni- al society, and a radical, counter-cultural critique of its tech- cal solutions to social problems. nocratic tendencies. How did this context inform AT demands? Social Movements and Research that steps outside movements and analyses Sociology of Technology their activity and influence in society needs to be considered carefully here. The literature tends to look at impacts that The Alternative Technology (AT) movement took an ex- work through political systems, since these tend to be a com- plicit interest in the way technology could help deliver social mon target for social movements. Questions of access might and environmental goals. Activists promoted technologies prove to be as pertinent for AT access to technology systems, such as renewable energy; organic food production; au- provided transpositions are made carefully. In the context of tonomous eco-housing and communities; co-operatively op- political systems, movement access is tied to the characteris- erated workshops; small-scale infrastructures for water; and tics of the system (van der Heijden 1999). How open are key so on. How might we understand this social movement ac- political institutions to new agendas and issues? Are there tivity? We begin with a brief summary of social movement many access points (e.g. through devolved governance or research and sociology of technology. No pretence is made multi-party systems), or are they limited by a centralised sys- at a comprehensive literature survey. Instead, the intention is tem? How easily do policy processes accommodate new to draw out themes relevant for analysing the AT movement voices (e.g. invitation to policy consultation)? Do political in the UK. elites seek to integrate and co-opt social movement chal- lenges, or exclude and repress? Themes in the Study of Social Movements Similar questions can be raised over access to technolo- Social movements are a challenging subject. Their dy- gy systems. What are the different routes for a social move- namic and informal nature make them a messy unit for analy- ment to access technology decisions? How open are the in- sis. Defined broadly, they operate in civil society arenas, novation processes to new participants? Do technology pro- within which networks of people and organisations engage in ducers integrate new demands or seek to exclude them? The collective actions towards common goals (Rootes 1999; Ed- UK technology system for energy, for example, was tightly wards and Gaventa 2001). Social movements are generally closed in the 1970s. It was a state-run monopoly with a pref- studied in relation to political systems, since these offer the erence for large-scale, fossil-fuel and nuclear technologies most obvious means towards movement goals (van der Heij- operated through highly-centralised control. There were few den 1999). Internal accounts of social movements seek un- points of access for the small-scale renewable energy ideas of derstandings of their evolving identity, organisation and dy- the AT movement. The food system, in contrast, was less mo- namics. External accounts analyse movement strategies and nopolistic. There was a slim opening for organic producers explain their impacts upon society (Foweraker 1995). Social to develop niche markets amongst the alternative milieu of movement impacts might be substantive (e.g. an AT demon- 1970s Britain. Significantly, the university research system stration centre or diffusion of a renewable energy technolo- offered a relatively open point of access for the development gy), procedural (e.g. incorporation of environmental criteria and propagation of AT ideas. Architectural schools, for ex- into innovation processes), structural (e.g. the creation of ample, allowed students and faculty to experiment with (and technology assessment institutions), or sensitising (e.g. rais- even live in) radical autonomous housing. University cours- ing environmental awareness) (ven der Heijden 1999). es incorporated AT ideas into their teaching materials, e.g. the Internal accounts might help identify why the AT move- Man-made Futures course at the Open University’s Technol- ment related to technology in the way that it did. Why, for ogy Faculty introduced AT to over 900 technology and design example, did the AT movement favour decentralised and students each year. small-scale forms of technology; and why were communal or In summary, the way the AT movement engaged with cooperative relations preferred in technology production and technology development, such as the strategies pursued, the use? Existing social movement research suggests a number directness of that engagement, and the impacts on innovation, of factors that could explain this AT framing of technology: can be explained by the identity and resources available to the the backgrounds of movement intellectuals; the social and movement, and the way opportunity structures facilitated and historical context under which the movement emerged; the constrained access to innovation processes. Of course, any worldview or ideology holding the movement together; key split between internal and external social movement process- ideas or principles; and/or the resources that can

Load more