technological development essay

• Previous Article
• Next Article

Promises and Pitfalls of Technology

Politics and privacy, private-sector influence and big tech, state competition and conflict, author biography, how is technology changing the world, and how should the world change technology.

[email protected]

• Split-Screen
• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• Open the PDF for in another window
• Guest Access
• Get Permissions
• Cite Icon Cite
• Search Site

Josephine Wolff; How Is Technology Changing the World, and How Should the World Change Technology?. Global Perspectives 1 February 2021; 2 (1): 27353. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/gp.2021.27353

Download citation file:

• Ris (Zotero)
• Reference Manager

Technologies are becoming increasingly complicated and increasingly interconnected. Cars, airplanes, medical devices, financial transactions, and electricity systems all rely on more computer software than they ever have before, making them seem both harder to understand and, in some cases, harder to control. Government and corporate surveillance of individuals and information processing relies largely on digital technologies and artificial intelligence, and therefore involves less human-to-human contact than ever before and more opportunities for biases to be embedded and codified in our technological systems in ways we may not even be able to identify or recognize. Bioengineering advances are opening up new terrain for challenging philosophical, political, and economic questions regarding human-natural relations. Additionally, the management of these large and small devices and systems is increasingly done through the cloud, so that control over them is both very remote and removed from direct human or social control. The study of how to make technologies like artificial intelligence or the Internet of Things “explainable” has become its own area of research because it is so difficult to understand how they work or what is at fault when something goes wrong (Gunning and Aha 2019) .

This growing complexity makes it more difficult than ever—and more imperative than ever—for scholars to probe how technological advancements are altering life around the world in both positive and negative ways and what social, political, and legal tools are needed to help shape the development and design of technology in beneficial directions. This can seem like an impossible task in light of the rapid pace of technological change and the sense that its continued advancement is inevitable, but many countries around the world are only just beginning to take significant steps toward regulating computer technologies and are still in the process of radically rethinking the rules governing global data flows and exchange of technology across borders.

These are exciting times not just for technological development but also for technology policy—our technologies may be more advanced and complicated than ever but so, too, are our understandings of how they can best be leveraged, protected, and even constrained. The structures of technological systems as determined largely by government and institutional policies and those structures have tremendous implications for social organization and agency, ranging from open source, open systems that are highly distributed and decentralized, to those that are tightly controlled and closed, structured according to stricter and more hierarchical models. And just as our understanding of the governance of technology is developing in new and interesting ways, so, too, is our understanding of the social, cultural, environmental, and political dimensions of emerging technologies. We are realizing both the challenges and the importance of mapping out the full range of ways that technology is changing our society, what we want those changes to look like, and what tools we have to try to influence and guide those shifts.

Technology can be a source of tremendous optimism. It can help overcome some of the greatest challenges our society faces, including climate change, famine, and disease. For those who believe in the power of innovation and the promise of creative destruction to advance economic development and lead to better quality of life, technology is a vital economic driver (Schumpeter 1942) . But it can also be a tool of tremendous fear and oppression, embedding biases in automated decision-making processes and information-processing algorithms, exacerbating economic and social inequalities within and between countries to a staggering degree, or creating new weapons and avenues for attack unlike any we have had to face in the past. Scholars have even contended that the emergence of the term technology in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries marked a shift from viewing individual pieces of machinery as a means to achieving political and social progress to the more dangerous, or hazardous, view that larger-scale, more complex technological systems were a semiautonomous form of progress in and of themselves (Marx 2010) . More recently, technologists have sharply criticized what they view as a wave of new Luddites, people intent on slowing the development of technology and turning back the clock on innovation as a means of mitigating the societal impacts of technological change (Marlowe 1970) .

At the heart of fights over new technologies and their resulting global changes are often two conflicting visions of technology: a fundamentally optimistic one that believes humans use it as a tool to achieve greater goals, and a fundamentally pessimistic one that holds that technological systems have reached a point beyond our control. Technology philosophers have argued that neither of these views is wholly accurate and that a purely optimistic or pessimistic view of technology is insufficient to capture the nuances and complexity of our relationship to technology (Oberdiek and Tiles 1995) . Understanding technology and how we can make better decisions about designing, deploying, and refining it requires capturing that nuance and complexity through in-depth analysis of the impacts of different technological advancements and the ways they have played out in all their complicated and controversial messiness across the world.

These impacts are often unpredictable as technologies are adopted in new contexts and come to be used in ways that sometimes diverge significantly from the use cases envisioned by their designers. The internet, designed to help transmit information between computer networks, became a crucial vehicle for commerce, introducing unexpected avenues for crime and financial fraud. Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter, designed to connect friends and families through sharing photographs and life updates, became focal points of election controversies and political influence. Cryptocurrencies, originally intended as a means of decentralized digital cash, have become a significant environmental hazard as more and more computing resources are devoted to mining these forms of virtual money. One of the crucial challenges in this area is therefore recognizing, documenting, and even anticipating some of these unexpected consequences and providing mechanisms to technologists for how to think through the impacts of their work, as well as possible other paths to different outcomes (Verbeek 2006) . And just as technological innovations can cause unexpected harm, they can also bring about extraordinary benefits—new vaccines and medicines to address global pandemics and save thousands of lives, new sources of energy that can drastically reduce emissions and help combat climate change, new modes of education that can reach people who would otherwise have no access to schooling. Regulating technology therefore requires a careful balance of mitigating risks without overly restricting potentially beneficial innovations.

Nations around the world have taken very different approaches to governing emerging technologies and have adopted a range of different technologies themselves in pursuit of more modern governance structures and processes (Braman 2009) . In Europe, the precautionary principle has guided much more anticipatory regulation aimed at addressing the risks presented by technologies even before they are fully realized. For instance, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation focuses on the responsibilities of data controllers and processors to provide individuals with access to their data and information about how that data is being used not just as a means of addressing existing security and privacy threats, such as data breaches, but also to protect against future developments and uses of that data for artificial intelligence and automated decision-making purposes. In Germany, Technische Überwachungsvereine, or TÜVs, perform regular tests and inspections of technological systems to assess and minimize risks over time, as the tech landscape evolves. In the United States, by contrast, there is much greater reliance on litigation and liability regimes to address safety and security failings after-the-fact. These different approaches reflect not just the different legal and regulatory mechanisms and philosophies of different nations but also the different ways those nations prioritize rapid development of the technology industry versus safety, security, and individual control. Typically, governance innovations move much more slowly than technological innovations, and regulations can lag years, or even decades, behind the technologies they aim to govern.

In addition to this varied set of national regulatory approaches, a variety of international and nongovernmental organizations also contribute to the process of developing standards, rules, and norms for new technologies, including the International Organization for Standardization­ and the International Telecommunication Union. These multilateral and NGO actors play an especially important role in trying to define appropriate boundaries for the use of new technologies by governments as instruments of control for the state.

At the same time that policymakers are under scrutiny both for their decisions about how to regulate technology as well as their decisions about how and when to adopt technologies like facial recognition themselves, technology firms and designers have also come under increasing criticism. Growing recognition that the design of technologies can have far-reaching social and political implications means that there is more pressure on technologists to take into consideration the consequences of their decisions early on in the design process (Vincenti 1993; Winner 1980) . The question of how technologists should incorporate these social dimensions into their design and development processes is an old one, and debate on these issues dates back to the 1970s, but it remains an urgent and often overlooked part of the puzzle because so many of the supposedly systematic mechanisms for assessing the impacts of new technologies in both the private and public sectors are primarily bureaucratic, symbolic processes rather than carrying any real weight or influence.

Technologists are often ill-equipped or unwilling to respond to the sorts of social problems that their creations have—often unwittingly—exacerbated, and instead point to governments and lawmakers to address those problems (Zuckerberg 2019) . But governments often have few incentives to engage in this area. This is because setting clear standards and rules for an ever-evolving technological landscape can be extremely challenging, because enforcement of those rules can be a significant undertaking requiring considerable expertise, and because the tech sector is a major source of jobs and revenue for many countries that may fear losing those benefits if they constrain companies too much. This indicates not just a need for clearer incentives and better policies for both private- and public-sector entities but also a need for new mechanisms whereby the technology development and design process can be influenced and assessed by people with a wider range of experiences and expertise. If we want technologies to be designed with an eye to their impacts, who is responsible for predicting, measuring, and mitigating those impacts throughout the design process? Involving policymakers in that process in a more meaningful way will also require training them to have the analytic and technical capacity to more fully engage with technologists and understand more fully the implications of their decisions.

At the same time that tech companies seem unwilling or unable to rein in their creations, many also fear they wield too much power, in some cases all but replacing governments and international organizations in their ability to make decisions that affect millions of people worldwide and control access to information, platforms, and audiences (Kilovaty 2020) . Regulators around the world have begun considering whether some of these companies have become so powerful that they violate the tenets of antitrust laws, but it can be difficult for governments to identify exactly what those violations are, especially in the context of an industry where the largest players often provide their customers with free services. And the platforms and services developed by tech companies are often wielded most powerfully and dangerously not directly by their private-sector creators and operators but instead by states themselves for widespread misinformation campaigns that serve political purposes (Nye 2018) .

Since the largest private entities in the tech sector operate in many countries, they are often better poised to implement global changes to the technological ecosystem than individual states or regulatory bodies, creating new challenges to existing governance structures and hierarchies. Just as it can be challenging to provide oversight for government use of technologies, so, too, oversight of the biggest tech companies, which have more resources, reach, and power than many nations, can prove to be a daunting task. The rise of network forms of organization and the growing gig economy have added to these challenges, making it even harder for regulators to fully address the breadth of these companies’ operations (Powell 1990) . The private-public partnerships that have emerged around energy, transportation, medical, and cyber technologies further complicate this picture, blurring the line between the public and private sectors and raising critical questions about the role of each in providing critical infrastructure, health care, and security. How can and should private tech companies operating in these different sectors be governed, and what types of influence do they exert over regulators? How feasible are different policy proposals aimed at technological innovation, and what potential unintended consequences might they have?

Conflict between countries has also spilled over significantly into the private sector in recent years, most notably in the case of tensions between the United States and China over which technologies developed in each country will be permitted by the other and which will be purchased by other customers, outside those two countries. Countries competing to develop the best technology is not a new phenomenon, but the current conflicts have major international ramifications and will influence the infrastructure that is installed and used around the world for years to come. Untangling the different factors that feed into these tussles as well as whom they benefit and whom they leave at a disadvantage is crucial for understanding how governments can most effectively foster technological innovation and invention domestically as well as the global consequences of those efforts. As much of the world is forced to choose between buying technology from the United States or from China, how should we understand the long-term impacts of those choices and the options available to people in countries without robust domestic tech industries? Does the global spread of technologies help fuel further innovation in countries with smaller tech markets, or does it reinforce the dominance of the states that are already most prominent in this sector? How can research universities maintain global collaborations and research communities in light of these national competitions, and what role does government research and development spending play in fostering innovation within its own borders and worldwide? How should intellectual property protections evolve to meet the demands of the technology industry, and how can those protections be enforced globally?

These conflicts between countries sometimes appear to challenge the feasibility of truly global technologies and networks that operate across all countries through standardized protocols and design features. Organizations like the International Organization for Standardization, the World Intellectual Property Organization, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, and many others have tried to harmonize these policies and protocols across different countries for years, but have met with limited success when it comes to resolving the issues of greatest tension and disagreement among nations. For technology to operate in a global environment, there is a need for a much greater degree of coordination among countries and the development of common standards and norms, but governments continue to struggle to agree not just on those norms themselves but even the appropriate venue and processes for developing them. Without greater global cooperation, is it possible to maintain a global network like the internet or to promote the spread of new technologies around the world to address challenges of sustainability? What might help incentivize that cooperation moving forward, and what could new structures and process for governance of global technologies look like? Why has the tech industry’s self-regulation culture persisted? Do the same traditional drivers for public policy, such as politics of harmonization and path dependency in policy-making, still sufficiently explain policy outcomes in this space? As new technologies and their applications spread across the globe in uneven ways, how and when do they create forces of change from unexpected places?

These are some of the questions that we hope to address in the Technology and Global Change section through articles that tackle new dimensions of the global landscape of designing, developing, deploying, and assessing new technologies to address major challenges the world faces. Understanding these processes requires synthesizing knowledge from a range of different fields, including sociology, political science, economics, and history, as well as technical fields such as engineering, climate science, and computer science. A crucial part of understanding how technology has created global change and, in turn, how global changes have influenced the development of new technologies is understanding the technologies themselves in all their richness and complexity—how they work, the limits of what they can do, what they were designed to do, how they are actually used. Just as technologies themselves are becoming more complicated, so are their embeddings and relationships to the larger social, political, and legal contexts in which they exist. Scholars across all disciplines are encouraged to join us in untangling those complexities.

Josephine Wolff is an associate professor of cybersecurity policy at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. Her book You’ll See This Message When It Is Too Late: The Legal and Economic Aftermath of Cybersecurity Breaches was published by MIT Press in 2018.

Recipient(s) will receive an email with a link to 'How Is Technology Changing the World, and How Should the World Change Technology?' and will not need an account to access the content.

Subject: How Is Technology Changing the World, and How Should the World Change Technology?

(Optional message may have a maximum of 1000 characters.)

Citing articles via

Email alerts, affiliations.

• Special Collections
• Review Symposia
• Info for Authors
• Info for Librarians
• Editorial Team
• Emerging Scholars Forum
• Open Access
• Online ISSN 2575-7350
• Copyright © 2024 The Regents of the University of California. All Rights Reserved.

Stay Informed

Disciplines.

• Ancient World
• Anthropology
• Communication
• Criminology & Criminal Justice
• Film & Media Studies
• Food & Wine
• Browse All Disciplines
• Browse All Courses
• Book Authors
• Booksellers
• Instructions
• Journal Authors
• Journal Editors
• Media & Journalists
• Planned Giving

About UC Press

• Press Releases
• Seasonal Catalog
• Acquisitions Editors
• Customer Service
• Exam/Desk Requests
• Media Inquiries
• Print-Disability
• Rights & Permissions
• UC Press Foundation
• © Copyright 2024 by the Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Privacy policy    Accessibility

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Your Article Library

Essay on technology and development.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Essay on Technology and Development!

Technology refers to the use of tools, machines, materials, techniques and sources of power to make work easier and more productive. While science is concerned with understanding how and why things happen, technology deals with making things happen.

Development is closely related with technology. The stage of development the human being has arrived could have been possible without the advancement in technology. The radical change and advancement in the economy, as we observe today, is the result of the modern technology.

Technology has brought about efficiency and quality in the manufacturing sector. Technological advancement has reduced the risk involved in manufacturing enterprises. There has been tremendous improvement in the field of health the world over not only the average age of people has increased but the mortality rate has also declined considerably.

This could be possible only because of technological advancement in health sector. There is perhaps no field of human life which has not been affected by technology. Agriculture, industry, profession, health, education, art, political processes, recreation, religious activities and daily life activities all are under the influence of technology.

But, it is important to keep in mind that technological advancement has affected human life both positively as Well as negatively. Not only that life has become easy and comfortable, there are also indications of several threats to life and society in the future due to use/misuse of modern technology.

The nature and extent of development the human society has experienced by now is heading towards crises in future. The sustainability of development is in question today. This has happened only due to irrational use of technology.

It has been discussed here as to how development – economic as well as social – takes place with the advancement of technology but not without leaving a scar to threaten the human society. The development of technology, which itself is symptomatic of development, has brought about not only economic development but also radical changes in the social and cultural spheres of society.

This articles also points out the negative effects of technological advancements on social, cultural and economic aspects of human life . Technological advancement and development have come to a stage where human society finds itself at a crossroads. The positive as well as negative roles of technology have put humans into to a situation of flux and confusion.

Related Articles:

• Inter-Relationship of Technology with Economic Development
• Human Development : Development in Economic, Social and Cultural Spheres

No comments yet.

Leave a reply click here to cancel reply..

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Feb 13, 2023

200-500 Word Example Essays about Technology

Got an essay assignment about technology check out these examples to inspire you.

Technology is a rapidly evolving field that has completely changed the way we live, work, and interact with one another. Technology has profoundly impacted our daily lives, from how we communicate with friends and family to how we access information and complete tasks. As a result, it's no surprise that technology is a popular topic for students writing essays.

But writing a technology essay can be challenging, especially for those needing more time or help with writer's block. This is where Jenni.ai comes in. Jenni.ai is an innovative AI tool explicitly designed for students who need help writing essays. With Jenni.ai, students can quickly and easily generate essays on various topics, including technology.

This blog post aims to provide readers with various example essays on technology, all generated by Jenni.ai. These essays will be a valuable resource for students looking for inspiration or guidance as they work on their essays. By reading through these example essays, students can better understand how technology can be approached and discussed in an essay.

Moreover, by signing up for a free trial with Jenni.ai, students can take advantage of this innovative tool and receive even more support as they work on their essays. Jenni.ai is designed to help students write essays faster and more efficiently, so they can focus on what truly matters – learning and growing as a student. Whether you're a student who is struggling with writer's block or simply looking for a convenient way to generate essays on a wide range of topics, Jenni.ai is the perfect solution.

The Impact of Technology on Society and Culture

Introduction:.

Technology has become an integral part of our daily lives and has dramatically impacted how we interact, communicate, and carry out various activities. Technological advancements have brought positive and negative changes to society and culture. In this article, we will explore the impact of technology on society and culture and how it has influenced different aspects of our lives.

Positive impact on communication:

Technology has dramatically improved communication and made it easier for people to connect from anywhere in the world. Social media platforms, instant messaging, and video conferencing have brought people closer, bridging geographical distances and cultural differences. This has made it easier for people to share information, exchange ideas, and collaborate on projects.

Positive impact on education:

Students and instructors now have access to a multitude of knowledge and resources because of the effect of technology on education . Students may now study at their speed and from any location thanks to online learning platforms, educational applications, and digital textbooks.

Negative impact on critical thinking and creativity:

Technological advancements have resulted in a reduction in critical thinking and creativity. With so much information at our fingertips, individuals have become more passive in their learning, relying on the internet for solutions rather than logic and inventiveness. As a result, independent thinking and problem-solving abilities have declined.

Positive impact on entertainment:

Technology has transformed how we access and consume entertainment. People may now access a wide range of entertainment alternatives from the comfort of their own homes thanks to streaming services, gaming platforms, and online content makers. The entertainment business has entered a new age of creativity and invention as a result of this.

Negative impact on attention span:

However, the continual bombardment of information and technological stimulation has also reduced attention span and the capacity to focus. People are easily distracted and need help focusing on a single activity for a long time. This has hampered productivity and the ability to accomplish duties.

The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence And Machine Learning

The development of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) technologies has been one of the most significant technological developments of the past several decades. These cutting-edge technologies have the potential to alter several sectors of society, including commerce, industry, healthcare, and entertainment. 

As with any new and quickly advancing technology, AI and ML ethics must be carefully studied. The usage of these technologies presents significant concerns around privacy, accountability, and command. As the use of AI and ML grows more ubiquitous, we must assess their possible influence on society and investigate the ethical issues that must be taken into account as these technologies continue to develop.

What are Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning?

Artificial Intelligence is the simulation of human intelligence in machines designed to think and act like humans. Machine learning is a subfield of AI that enables computers to learn from data and improve their performance over time without being explicitly programmed.

The impact of AI and ML on Society

The use of AI and ML in various industries, such as healthcare, finance, and retail, has brought many benefits. For example, AI-powered medical diagnosis systems can identify diseases faster and more accurately than human doctors. However, there are also concerns about job displacement and the potential for AI to perpetuate societal biases.

The Ethical Considerations of AI and ML

A. Bias in AI algorithms

One of the critical ethical concerns about AI and ML is the potential for algorithms to perpetuate existing biases. This can occur if the data used to train these algorithms reflects the preferences of the people who created it. As a result, AI systems can perpetuate these biases and discriminate against certain groups of people.

B. Responsibility for AI-generated decisions

Another ethical concern is the responsibility for decisions made by AI systems. For example, who is responsible for the damage if a self-driving car causes an accident? The manufacturer of the vehicle, the software developer, or the AI algorithm itself?

C. The potential for misuse of AI and ML

AI and ML can also be used for malicious purposes, such as cyberattacks and misinformation. The need for more regulation and oversight in developing and using these technologies makes it difficult to prevent misuse.

The developments in AI and ML have given numerous benefits to humanity, but they also present significant ethical concerns that must be addressed. We must assess the repercussions of new technologies on society, implement methods to limit the associated dangers, and guarantee that they are utilized for the greater good. As AI and ML continue to play an ever-increasing role in our daily lives, we must engage in an open and frank discussion regarding their ethics.

The Future of Work And Automation

Rapid technological breakthroughs in recent years have brought about considerable changes in our way of life and work. Concerns regarding the influence of artificial intelligence and machine learning on the future of work and employment have increased alongside the development of these technologies. This article will examine the possible advantages and disadvantages of automation and its influence on the labor market, employees, and the economy.

The Advantages of Automation

Automation in the workplace offers various benefits, including higher efficiency and production, fewer mistakes, and enhanced precision. Automated processes may accomplish repetitive jobs quickly and precisely, allowing employees to concentrate on more complex and creative activities. Additionally, automation may save organizations money since it removes the need to pay for labor and minimizes the danger of workplace accidents.

The Potential Disadvantages of Automation

However, automation has significant disadvantages, including job loss and income stagnation. As robots and computers replace human labor in particular industries, there is a danger that many workers may lose their jobs, resulting in higher unemployment and more significant economic disparity. Moreover, if automation is not adequately regulated and managed, it might lead to stagnant wages and a deterioration in employees' standard of life.

The Future of Work and Automation

Despite these difficulties, automation will likely influence how labor is done. As a result, firms, employees, and governments must take early measures to solve possible issues and reap the rewards of automation. This might entail funding worker retraining programs, enhancing education and skill development, and implementing regulations that support equality and justice at work.

IV. The Need for Ethical Considerations

We must consider the ethical ramifications of automation and its effects on society as technology develops. The impact on employees and their rights, possible hazards to privacy and security, and the duty of corporations and governments to ensure that automation is utilized responsibly and ethically are all factors to be taken into account.

Conclusion:

To summarise, the future of employment and automation will most certainly be defined by a complex interaction of technological advances, economic trends, and cultural ideals. All stakeholders must work together to handle the problems and possibilities presented by automation and ensure that technology is employed to benefit society as a whole.

The Role of Technology in Education

Introduction.

Nearly every part of our lives has been transformed by technology, and education is no different. Today's students have greater access to knowledge, opportunities, and resources than ever before, and technology is becoming a more significant part of their educational experience. Technology is transforming how we think about education and creating new opportunities for learners of all ages, from online courses and virtual classrooms to instructional applications and augmented reality.

Technology's Benefits for Education

The capacity to tailor learning is one of technology's most significant benefits in education. Students may customize their education to meet their unique needs and interests since they can access online information and tools. 

For instance, people can enroll in online classes on topics they are interested in, get tailored feedback on their work, and engage in virtual discussions with peers and subject matter experts worldwide. As a result, pupils are better able to acquire and develop the abilities and information necessary for success.

Challenges and Concerns

Despite the numerous advantages of technology in education, there are also obstacles and considerations to consider. One issue is the growing reliance on technology and the possibility that pupils would become overly dependent on it. This might result in a lack of critical thinking and problem-solving abilities, as students may become passive learners who only follow instructions and rely on technology to complete their assignments.

Another obstacle is the digital divide between those who have access to technology and those who do not. This division can exacerbate the achievement gap between pupils and produce uneven educational and professional growth chances. To reduce these consequences, all students must have access to the technology and resources necessary for success.

In conclusion, technology is rapidly becoming an integral part of the classroom experience and has the potential to alter the way we learn radically. 

Technology can help students flourish and realize their full potential by giving them access to individualized instruction, tools, and opportunities. While the benefits of technology in the classroom are undeniable, it's crucial to be mindful of the risks and take precautions to guarantee that all kids have access to the tools they need to thrive.

The Influence of Technology On Personal Relationships And Communication 

Technological advancements have profoundly altered how individuals connect and exchange information. It has changed the world in many ways in only a few decades. Because of the rise of the internet and various social media sites, maintaining relationships with people from all walks of life is now simpler than ever. 

However, concerns about how these developments may affect interpersonal connections and dialogue are inevitable in an era of rapid technological growth. In this piece, we'll discuss how the prevalence of digital media has altered our interpersonal connections and the language we use to express ourselves.

Direct Effect on Direct Interaction:

The disruption of face-to-face communication is a particularly stark example of how technology has impacted human connections. The quality of interpersonal connections has suffered due to people's growing preference for digital over human communication. Technology has been demonstrated to reduce the usage of nonverbal signs such as facial expressions, tone of voice, and other indicators of emotional investment in the connection.

Positive Impact on Long-Distance Relationships:

Yet there are positives to be found as well. Long-distance relationships have also benefited from technological advancements. The development of technologies such as video conferencing, instant messaging, and social media has made it possible for individuals to keep in touch with distant loved ones. It has become simpler for individuals to stay in touch and feel connected despite geographical distance.

The Effects of Social Media on Personal Connections:

The widespread use of social media has had far-reaching consequences, especially on the quality of interpersonal interactions. Social media has positive and harmful effects on relationships since it allows people to keep in touch and share life's milestones.

Unfortunately, social media has made it all too easy to compare oneself to others, which may lead to emotions of jealousy and a general decline in confidence. Furthermore, social media might cause people to have inflated expectations of themselves and their relationships.

A Personal Perspective on the Intersection of Technology and Romance

Technological advancements have also altered physical touch and closeness. Virtual reality and other technologies have allowed people to feel physical contact and familiarity in a digital setting. This might be a promising breakthrough, but it has some potential downsides. 

Experts are concerned that people's growing dependence on technology for intimacy may lead to less time spent communicating face-to-face and less emphasis on physical contact, both of which are important for maintaining good relationships.

In conclusion, technological advancements have significantly affected the quality of interpersonal connections and the exchange of information. Even though technology has made it simpler to maintain personal relationships, it has chilled interpersonal interactions between people. 

Keeping tabs on how technology is changing our lives and making adjustments as necessary is essential as we move forward. Boundaries and prioritizing in-person conversation and physical touch in close relationships may help reduce the harm it causes.

The Security and Privacy Implications of Increased Technology Use and Data Collection

The fast development of technology over the past few decades has made its way into every aspect of our life. Technology has improved many facets of our life, from communication to commerce. However, significant privacy and security problems have emerged due to the broad adoption of technology. In this essay, we'll look at how the widespread use of technological solutions and the subsequent explosion in collected data affects our right to privacy and security.

Data Mining and Privacy Concerns

Risk of Cyber Attacks and Data Loss

The Widespread Use of Encryption and Other Safety Mechanisms

The Privacy and Security of the Future in a Globalized Information Age

Obtaining and Using Individual Information

The acquisition and use of private information is a significant cause for privacy alarm in the digital age. Data about their customers' online habits, interests, and personal information is a valuable commodity for many internet firms. Besides tailored advertising, this information may be used for other, less desirable things like identity theft or cyber assaults.

Moreover, many individuals need to be made aware of what data is being gathered from them or how it is being utilized because of the lack of transparency around gathering personal information. Privacy and data security have become increasingly contentious as a result.

Data breaches and other forms of cyber-attack pose a severe risk.

The risk of cyber assaults and data breaches is another big issue of worry. More people are using more devices, which means more opportunities for cybercriminals to steal private information like credit card numbers and other identifying data. This may cause monetary damages and harm one's reputation or identity.

Many high-profile data breaches have occurred in recent years, exposing the personal information of millions of individuals and raising serious concerns about the safety of this information. Companies and governments have responded to this problem by adopting new security methods like encryption and multi-factor authentication.

Many businesses now use encryption and other security measures to protect themselves from cybercriminals and data thieves. Encryption keeps sensitive information hidden by encoding it so that only those possessing the corresponding key can decipher it. This prevents private information like bank account numbers or social security numbers from falling into the wrong hands.

Firewalls, virus scanners, and two-factor authentication are all additional security precautions that may be used with encryption. While these safeguards do much to stave against cyber assaults, they are not entirely impregnable, and data breaches are still possible.

The Future of Privacy and Security in a Technologically Advanced World

There's little doubt that concerns about privacy and security will persist even as technology improves. There must be strict safeguards to secure people's private information as more and more of it is transferred and kept digitally. To achieve this goal, it may be necessary to implement novel technologies and heightened levels of protection and to revise the rules and regulations regulating the collection and storage of private information.

Individuals and businesses are understandably concerned about the security and privacy consequences of widespread technological use and data collecting. There are numerous obstacles to overcome in a society where technology plays an increasingly important role, from acquiring and using personal data to the risk of cyber-attacks and data breaches. Companies and governments must keep spending money on security measures and working to educate people about the significance of privacy and security if personal data is to remain safe.

In conclusion, technology has profoundly impacted virtually every aspect of our lives, including society and culture, ethics, work, education, personal relationships, and security and privacy. The rise of artificial intelligence and machine learning has presented new ethical considerations, while automation is transforming the future of work. 

In education, technology has revolutionized the way we learn and access information. At the same time, our dependence on technology has brought new challenges in terms of personal relationships, communication, security, and privacy.

Jenni.ai is an AI tool that can help students write essays easily and quickly. Whether you're looking, for example, for essays on any of these topics or are seeking assistance in writing your essay, Jenni.ai offers a convenient solution. Sign up for a free trial today and experience the benefits of AI-powered writing assistance for yourself.

Try Jenni for free today

Create your first piece of content with Jenni today and never look back

• IELTS Scores
• Life Skills Test
• Find a Test Centre
• Alternatives to IELTS
• General Training
• Academic Word List
• Topic Vocabulary
• Collocation
• Phrasal Verbs
• Writing eBooks
• Reading eBook
• All eBooks & Courses
• Sample Essays
• Technology Development Essay

Technology Development Essay 

This technology development essay for IELTS shows you the flexibility you can have with your opinion when you approach an agree / disagree type question.

The topic is about whether you think earlier or more recent technological developments have had more influence on people's lives. Take a look at the question below. 

Earlier technological developments brought more benefits and changed the lives of ordinary people more than recent developments ever will.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

This technology development essay question is quite complex and it is very easy to make mistakes when answering it. Some typical issues are:

• Not understanding 'ordinary people'
• Misunderstanding 'ever will' and writing about future developments
• Deciding which technological developments are 'earlier' or more 'recent'
• Writing about the pros and cons of technology only and not really addressing the question

There is a Task 2 Lesson on tackling this topic already, so please check it out if you want more guidance on understanding the question and making sure you answer it fully .  

Flexibility with your opinion

Candidates often think that they have to give an opinion that will satisfy the examiner. However, the opinion you give should be yours and the examiner can't penalise you if it is not what s/he would think.

Of course your essay  must answer the question  and the position you take must be  consistent  throughout your essay ( e.g. saying you agree but then having an essay where nearly all of it disagrees would not make sense ).

A typical way to answer this question would be to choose whether you think earlier or more recent developments are more influential, than explain why in your essay.

In other words. to choose and support one of these as your opinion ( though of course you should still write about both ):

• Earlier technological developments had the most influence and benefits
• More recent technological developments had the most influence and benefits

It's ok though to take a different approach. 

Let's say you think it is not a matter of comparing old with new - rather you think some earlier ones are more influential, but some older ones are more influential. So it depends which developments are being talked about. 

As long as you explain this in your  thesis statement  and your essay this is fine, and of course as long as you are still comparing some earlier and recent technological developments. 

Sample Technology Development Essay

So take a look at this technology development essay and note how the writer still fully answers the question but take a different view to that of the opinion in the question.

This essay is organised as follows:

• Opinion: Depend on the area of technology
• Body Para 1: Technology in the home ( earlier more important )
• Body Para 2: Medical Technology (e arlier more important )
• Body Para 3: Phones ( recent more important )
• Conc: Restate opinion

In this thesis, you could just state your opinion generally or to be clear say you are either disagreeing or partially agreeing with statement. 

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Write about the following topic:

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own experience or knowledge.

Write at least 250 words.

Technology Development Essay Model Answer

Developments in technology over many years have dramatically changed the world that we live in, and some people think that earlier advances in technology have had a greater impact on and been more beneficial to the lives of ordinary people than more recent changes. However, I partially agree with this as the advantages and influences on people’s lives actually depends on the particular area of technology.

There is no doubt that some earlier advances in technology have been very influential, such as those related to technology around the home. Devices such as washing machines, fridges and freezers, central heating, microwaves and televisions were invented many years ago, and now nearly every household has all or some of these in their home, making life much easier. Though they have been improved over time, they still carry out much the same purpose as when they were first invented. 

Another example is that of medicine. Despite the fact that there have been ground-breaking recent medical developments, such as that connected to research into genes and stem cells, the benefits to the average person are still many years away. The most influential impacts on health have been earlier technological developments of the past, which remain today. These are the ability to treat so many injuries and diseases and carry out organ transplants in hospitals. It is these that have benefits on so many lives and will for decades to come. 

However, if we look at some more recent developments, they have had a much greater influence than in the past. For instance, there is the phone, which was a significant development when invented helping many people. However, although invented many years ago, technological developments over the last few decades have enabled the phone to now be mobile and connected to the internet. This has had incredible impacts on the way people Iive their lives with people using phones for so many everyday activities and for connecting around the world.

In conclusion, I would argue that although some older technological developments are important, some new ones are too. The impacts on ordinary people’s lives therefore depends on the type of technology in question. 

(356 Words)

This technology development essay would get a high score as it fully answers the question and fully extends and supports the ideas presented. 

Even though the essay does not specifically choose one side as presented in the technology development essay prompt, it presents a very clear opinion / position directly related to the question, and then supports this in the essay. 

Also, earlier and more recent developments are compared and discussed. 

You may have noted the length is 356 words. Some higher level candidates can reach this length in the test, but if you have more difficultly with your writing you should of course seek to aim for around 275 words (the minimum is 250 words).

You can still get a high score with 275 words, providing of course it is scores highly for the four marking criteria in the grading system ( Task Response; Coherence and Cohesion; Lexical Resource; Grammatical Range and Accuracy ). 

<<< Back

Next >>>

More Agree / Disagree Essays:

IELTS Internet Essay: Is the internet damaging social interaction?

Internet Essay for IELTS on the topic of the Internet and social interaction. Included is a model answer. The IELTS test usually focuses on topical issues. You have to discuss if you think that the Internet is damaging social interaction.

Multinational Organisations and Culture Essay

Multinational Organisations and Culture Essay: Improve you score for IELTS Essay writing by studying model essays. This Essay is about the extent to which working for a multinational organisation help you to understand other cultures.

Internet vs Newspaper Essay: Which will be the best source of news?

A recent topic to write about in the IELTS exam was an Internet vs Newspaper Essay. The question was: Although more and more people read news on the internet, newspapers will remain the most important source of news. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Sample IELTS Writing: Is spending on the Arts a waste of money?

Sample IELTS Writing: A common topic in IELTS is whether you think it is a good idea for government money to be spent on the arts. i.e. the visual arts, literary and the performing arts, or whether it should be spent elsewhere, usually on other public services.

Scientific Research Essay: Who should be responsible for its funding?

Scientific research essay model answer for Task 2 of the test. For this essay, you need to discuss whether the funding and controlling of scientific research should be the responsibility of the government or private organizations.

Examinations Essay: Formal Examinations or Continual Assessment?

Examinations Essay: This IELTS model essay deals with the issue of whether it is better to have formal examinations to assess student’s performance or continual assessment during term time such as course work and projects.

Paying Taxes Essay: Should people keep all the money they earn?

Paying Taxes Essay: Read model essays to help you improve your IELTS Writing Score for Task 2. In this essay you have to decide whether you agree or disagree with the opinion that everyone should be able to keep their money rather than paying money to the government.

Employing Older People Essay: Is the modern workplace suitable?

Employing Older People Essay. Examine model essays for IELTS Task 2 to improve your score. This essay tackles the issue of whether it it better for employers to hire younger staff rather than those who are older.

Human Cloning Essay: Should we be scared of cloning humans?

Human cloning essay - this is on the topic of cloning humans to use their body parts. You are asked if you agree with human cloning to use their body parts, and what reservations (concerns) you have.

Free University Education Essay: Should it be paid for or free?

Free university education Model IELTS essay. Learn how to write high-scoring IELTS essays. The issue of free university education is an essay topic that comes up in the IELTS test. This essay therefore provides you with some of the key arguments about this topic.

IELTS Sample Essay: Is alternative medicine ineffective & dangerous?

IELTS sample essay about alternative and conventional medicine - this shows you how to present a well-balanced argument. When you are asked whether you agree (or disagree), you can look at both sides of the argument if you want.

IELTS Vegetarianism Essay: Should we all be vegetarian to be healthy?

Vegetarianism Essay for IELTS: In this vegetarianism essay, the candidate disagrees with the statement, and is thus arguing that everyone does not need to be a vegetarian.

Essay for IELTS: Are some advertising methods unethical?

This is an agree / disagree type question. Your options are: 1. Agree 100% 2. Disagree 100% 3. Partly agree. In the answer below, the writer agrees 100% with the opinion. There is an analysis of the answer.

Ban Smoking in Public Places Essay: Should the government ban it?

Ban smoking in public places essay: The sample answer shows you how you can present the opposing argument first, that is not your opinion, and then present your opinion in the following paragraph.

Dying Languages Essay: Is a world with fewer languages a good thing?

Dying languages essays have appeared in IELTS on several occasions, an issue related to the spread of globalisation. Check out a sample question and model answer.

Truthfulness in Relationships Essay: How important is it?

This truthfulness in relationships essay for IELTS is an agree / disagree type essay. You need to decide if it's the most important factor.

Airline Tax Essay: Would taxing air travel reduce pollution?

Airline Tax Essay for IELTS. Practice an agree and disagree essay on the topic of taxing airlines to reduce low-cost air traffic. You are asked to decide if you agree or disagree with taxing airlines in order to reduce the problems caused.

Role of Schools Essay: How should schools help children develop?

This role of schools essay for IELTS is an agree disagree type essay where you have to discuss how schools should help children to develop.

Extinction of Animals Essay: Should we prevent this from happening?

In this extinction of animals essay for IELTS you have to decide whether you think humans should do what they can to prevent the extinction of animal species.

Return of Historical Objects and Artefacts Essay

This essay discusses the topic of returning historical objects and artefacts to their country of origin. It's an agree/disagree type IELTS question.

Any comments or questions about this page or about IELTS? Post them here. Your email will not be published or shared.

Before you go...

Check out the ielts buddy band 7+ ebooks & courses.

Would you prefer to share this page with others by linking to it?

• Click on the HTML link code below.
• Copy and paste it, adding a note of your own, into your blog, a Web page, forums, a blog comment, your Facebook account, or anywhere that someone would find this page valuable.

Band 7+ eBooks

"I think these eBooks are FANTASTIC!!! I know that's not academic language, but it's the truth!"

Linda, from Italy, Scored Band 7.5

IELTS Modules:

Other resources:.

• All Lessons
• Band Score Calculator
• Writing Feedback
• Speaking Feedback
• Teacher Resources
• Free Downloads
• Recent Essay Exam Questions
• Books for IELTS Prep
• Useful Links

Recent Articles

Decreasing House Sizes Essay

Apr 06, 24 10:22 AM

Latest IELTS Writing Topics - Recent Exam Questions

Apr 04, 24 02:36 AM

IELTS Essay: English as a Global Language

Apr 03, 24 03:49 PM

Important pages

IELTS Writing IELTS Speaking IELTS Listening   IELTS Reading All Lessons Vocabulary Academic Task 1 Academic Task 2 Practice Tests

Connect with us

Copyright © 2022- IELTSbuddy All Rights Reserved

IELTS is a registered trademark of University of Cambridge, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia. This site and its owners are not affiliated, approved or endorsed by the University of Cambridge ESOL, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia.

Technology over the long run: zoom out to see how dramatically the world can change within a lifetime

It is easy to underestimate how much the world can change within a lifetime. considering how dramatically the world has changed can help us see how different the world could be in a few years or decades..

Technology can change the world in ways that are unimaginable until they happen. Switching on an electric light would have been unimaginable for our medieval ancestors. In their childhood, our grandparents would have struggled to imagine a world connected by smartphones and the Internet.

Similarly, it is hard for us to imagine the arrival of all those technologies that will fundamentally change the world we are used to.

We can remind ourselves that our own future might look very different from the world today by looking back at how rapidly technology has changed our world in the past. That’s what this article is about.

One insight I take away from this long-term perspective is how unusual our time is. Technological change was extremely slow in the past – the technologies that our ancestors got used to in their childhood were still central to their lives in their old age. In stark contrast to those days, we live in a time of extraordinarily fast technological change. For recent generations, it was common for technologies that were unimaginable in their youth to become common later in life.

The long-run perspective on technological change

The big visualization offers a long-term perspective on the history of technology. 1

The timeline begins at the center of the spiral. The first use of stone tools, 3.4 million years ago, marks the beginning of this history of technology. 2 Each turn of the spiral represents 200,000 years of history. It took 2.4 million years – 12 turns of the spiral – for our ancestors to control fire and use it for cooking. 3

To be able to visualize the inventions in the more recent past – the last 12,000 years – I had to unroll the spiral. I needed more space to be able to show when agriculture, writing, and the wheel were invented. During this period, technological change was faster, but it was still relatively slow: several thousand years passed between each of these three inventions.

From 1800 onwards, I stretched out the timeline even further to show the many major inventions that rapidly followed one after the other.

The long-term perspective that this chart provides makes it clear just how unusually fast technological change is in our time.

You can use this visualization to see how technology developed in particular domains. Follow, for example, the history of communication: from writing to paper, to the printing press, to the telegraph, the telephone, the radio, all the way to the Internet and smartphones.

Or follow the rapid development of human flight. In 1903, the Wright brothers took the first flight in human history (they were in the air for less than a minute), and just 66 years later, we landed on the moon. Many people saw both within their lifetimes: the first plane and the moon landing.

This large visualization also highlights the wide range of technology’s impact on our lives. It includes extraordinarily beneficial innovations, such as the vaccine that allowed humanity to eradicate smallpox , and it includes terrible innovations, like the nuclear bombs that endanger the lives of all of us .

What will the next decades bring?

The red timeline reaches up to the present and then continues in green into the future. Many children born today, even without further increases in life expectancy, will live well into the 22nd century.

New vaccines, progress in clean, low-carbon energy, better cancer treatments – a range of future innovations could very much improve our living conditions and the environment around us. But, as I argue in a series of articles , there is one technology that could even more profoundly change our world: artificial intelligence (AI).

One reason why artificial intelligence is such an important innovation is that intelligence is the main driver of innovation itself. This fast-paced technological change could speed up even more if it’s driven not only by humanity’s intelligence but also by artificial intelligence. If this happens, the change currently stretched out over decades might happen within a very brief time span of just a year. Possibly even faster. 4

I think AI technology could have a fundamentally transformative impact on our world. In many ways, it is already changing our world, as I documented in this companion article . As this technology becomes more capable in the years and decades to come, it can give immense power to those who control it (and it poses the risk that it could escape our control entirely).

Such systems might seem hard to imagine today, but AI technology is advancing quickly. Many AI experts believe there is a real chance that human-level artificial intelligence will be developed within the next decades, as I documented in this article .

Technology will continue to change the world – we should all make sure that it changes it for the better

What is familiar to us today – photography, the radio, antibiotics, the Internet, or the International Space Station circling our planet – was unimaginable to our ancestors just a few generations ago. If your great-great-great grandparents could spend a week with you, they would be blown away by your everyday life.

What I take away from this history is that I will likely see technologies in my lifetime that appear unimaginable to me today.

In addition to this trend towards increasingly rapid innovation, there is a second long-run trend. Technology has become increasingly powerful. While our ancestors wielded stone tools, we are building globe-spanning AI systems and technologies that can edit our genes.

Because of the immense power that technology gives those who control it, there is little that is as important as the question of which technologies get developed during our lifetimes. Therefore, I think it is a mistake to leave the question about the future of technology to the technologists. Which technologies are controlled by whom is one of the most important political questions of our time because of the enormous power these technologies convey to those who control them.

We all should strive to gain the knowledge we need to contribute to an intelligent debate about the world we want to live in. To a large part, this means gaining knowledge and wisdom on the question of which technologies we want.

Acknowledgments: I would like to thank my colleagues Hannah Ritchie, Bastian Herre, Natasha Ahuja, Edouard Mathieu, Daniel Bachler, Charlie Giattino, and Pablo Rosado for their helpful comments on drafts of this essay and the visualization. Thanks also to Lizka Vaintrob and Ben Clifford for the conversation that initiated this visualization.

Appendix: About the choice of visualization in this article

The recent speed of technological change makes it difficult to picture the history of technology in one visualization. When you visualize this development on a linear timeline, then most of the timeline is almost empty, while all the action is crammed into the right corner:

In my large visualization here, I tried to avoid this problem and instead show the long history of technology in a way that lets you see when each technological breakthrough happened and how, within the last millennia, there was a continuous acceleration of technological change.

The recent speed of technological change makes it difficult to picture the history of technology in one visualization. In the appendix, I show how this would look if it were linear.

It is, of course, difficult to assess when exactly the first stone tools were used.

The research by McPherron et al. (2010) suggested that it was at least 3.39 million years ago. This is based on two fossilized bones found in Dikika in Ethiopia, which showed “stone-tool cut marks for flesh removal and percussion marks for marrow access”. These marks were interpreted as being caused by meat consumption and provide the first evidence that one of our ancestors, Australopithecus afarensis, used stone tools.

The research by Harmand et al. (2015) provided evidence for stone tool use in today’s Kenya 3.3 million years ago.

References:

McPherron et al. (2010) – Evidence for stone-tool-assisted consumption of animal tissues before 3.39 million years ago at Dikika, Ethiopia . Published in Nature.

Harmand et al. (2015) – 3.3-million-year-old stone tools from Lomekwi 3, West Turkana, Kenya . Published in Nature.

Evidence for controlled fire use approximately 1 million years ago is provided by Berna et al. (2012) Microstratigraphic evidence of in situ fire in the Acheulean strata of Wonderwerk Cave, Northern Cape province, South Africa , published in PNAS.

The authors write: “The ability to control fire was a crucial turning point in human evolution, but the question of when hominins first developed this ability still remains. Here we show that micromorphological and Fourier transform infrared microspectroscopy (mFTIR) analyses of intact sediments at the site of Wonderwerk Cave, Northern Cape province, South Africa, provide unambiguous evidence—in the form of burned bone and ashed plant remains—that burning took place in the cave during the early Acheulean occupation, approximately 1.0 Ma. To the best of our knowledge, this is the earliest secure evidence for burning in an archaeological context.”

This is what authors like Holden Karnofsky called ‘Process for Automating Scientific and Technological Advancement’ or PASTA. Some recent developments go in this direction: DeepMind’s AlphaFold helped to make progress on one of the large problems in biology, and they have also developed an AI system that finds new algorithms that are relevant to building a more powerful AI.

Cite this work

Our articles and data visualizations rely on work from many different people and organizations. When citing this article, please also cite the underlying data sources. This article can be cited as:

BibTeX citation

Reuse this work freely

All visualizations, data, and code produced by Our World in Data are completely open access under the Creative Commons BY license . You have the permission to use, distribute, and reproduce these in any medium, provided the source and authors are credited.

The data produced by third parties and made available by Our World in Data is subject to the license terms from the original third-party authors. We will always indicate the original source of the data in our documentation, so you should always check the license of any such third-party data before use and redistribution.

All of our charts can be embedded in any site.

Our World in Data is free and accessible for everyone.

Help us do this work by making a donation.

Technological Development

How it works

As a group we have decided to discuss innovation as it pertains to leadership. When looking at the transformational map we have discovered five major keys related to innovation which are business model innovation, innovation for social benefit, innovation systems, technological innovation, and government innovation. After performing extensive research on each of these categories we have ultimately decided to focus on technological innovation as we believe that it may be one of the most impactful influencers on leaders moving forward. As we know, we are in an age of growing technology and we are being forced to adapt as we move forward, so we figured that we should research the ways in which these technological innovations may have an impact on our futures.

The main topics that we have chosen to discuss are Human Enhancement, Entrepreneurship, Digital Communication, Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, and the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

Human Enhancement

The first thing that traditionally comes to mind when we think about human enhancement is the physical enhancement of one’s body simply by using dietary supplements or anabolic steroids to encourage muscle growth. However, with regards to technological innovation; Human Enhancement is essentially the concept of applying science and technologies to expand cognitive and physical human capacities (AAAS, 2018). This is going to be majorly impactful on the role of leadership in the future as human enhancement is driven to improve humans’ all-round capabilities.

Some may argue that leadership skills are something that individuals may be born with, and in their lives tend to strengthen their leadership capabilities by working on things such as communication, charisma, and problem-solving methods. With Human Enhancement technologies however, there are ways in which this sort of enhancement can be planted into someone’s body. There have been cases developing over the years with examples of scientists implanting artificial retinas to give blind patients partial sight or inserting a chip into a paralyzed man’s brain that is linked to a computer to generate partial movement which just goes to show the capabilities of such human enhancement tools. Another very important development that has been created over the years is what is known as the CRISPR; which is clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats, that is meant to improve scientists’ ability to accurately and efficiently edit the human genome (Masci, 2016).

With developments and creations like the previously mentioned CRIPSR, humans’ leadership capabilities may be increased by a significant amount as these scientists may ultimately have the power to create ideal leaders based on their abilities to systematically and critically think through situations that may best suit their subordinates (Masci, 2016). Although this may be a positive thing, critics about Human Enhancement methods and technologies say that they can potentially do more harm than good as people who have been able to get the enhancement done may lack empathy and look down at those who have chosen not to do it or may not have been able to afford it. As we know, empathy is one of the most important traits of a leader which is something that must be taken into consideration by these scientists working on the projects. There must be some way for them to insert a gene that boosts human empathy to improve someone’s leadership skills.

Altogether, human enhancement may have a positive impact on leadership in the future as these technologies have the ability to increase someone’s charisma, critical thinking, and communication skills which is ultimately some of the most important characteristics of a leader.

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2018). SRHRL Past Projects: Human Enhancement. Retrieved from https://www.aaas.org/programs/scientific-responsibility-human-rights-law/past-projects/human-enhancement

Masci, D. (2016, Jul 26). Human Enhancement. The Scientific and Ethical Dimensions of Striving for Perfection. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/essay/human-enhancement-the-scientific-and-ethical-dimensions-of-striving-for-perfection/

Artificial Intelligence and Robotics-Wenyue

Artificial intelligence and robotics hold the potential of being a transformational technology in any organization (Moulds, 2018). There is a growing concern of whether the robots fitted with artificial intelligence will replace people in the workplace and their impact on the leadership of an organization. It is evident that future leaders will need an extra set of skills to be able to run the organization effectively with robots fitted with artificial intelligence on board. This is because artificial intelligence and robotics in an organization will render some skills irrelevant and create a need for future leaders having new skills. On the other hand, artificial intelligence and robotics hold the potential of unlocking discoveries that haven’t been conceived yet.

As artificial intelligence and robotics are being installed and integrated into more operations in an organization, the primary components of leadership must be redefined across all levels and overall strategy (Moulds, 2018). Organization leaders will need new skills to make strategies. One of the main skill future leaders need is quick-decision making. Future leaders need this skill to run an organization smoothly since the robots will require new instructions within a short period. Also, future leaders will be required to have additional information technology skills rather than common business administration skills. This tech management skills will enable managers to understand technology and utilize its opportunities and challenges within workplace roles, data management, career skills, and development.

Future leaders also need to have diverse team management skills. They will need to learn to build cultures in a non-traditional work environment where there are fewer humans and numerous robots and automated systems. Even though future leaders may not hold these technical roles solely, they will need to be aware of what artificial intelligence and robotics are and how they can help their employees understand the roles.

Moulds, J. (2018, June 26). Robot managers: the future of work or a step too far? Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/business-to-business/2018/apr/06/robot-managers-how-a-firm-automated

Entrepreneurship

Entrepreneurship is arguable the most central initiative of economic value creation including new startups and regenerating force with established companies. Entrepreneurship is also a way to discover opportunities like activating resources to utilize and unleashing the forces of creative destruction to transform existing industries (Arias, Skibsted, De Cuyper, & Ziskind, 2018). Another key element of entrepreneurship is becoming entrepreneurial results in bringing markets back into competitive equilibrium. People are driven to maximize individual economic utility and act opportunistically, changing and rethinking demands and rethink what entrepreneurship could become in the future (Arias, Skibsted, De Cuyper, & Ziskind, 2018).

There are two specific types of entrepreneurship talked about in the article, 2018 State of digital transformation. The first type is traditional entrepreneurship which is when someone creates and innovates to build something of recognized value (Eaves & McGuire, 2018). Within this type, entrepreneurs are more motivated by financial gain and seek personal or shareholder benefit. There is also higher level of self-interest and of drive and determination while having lower levels of social conscience. On the other side, the other type is called social entrepreneurship. In this type of entrepreneurship, people seek to maximize social value or social capital from non-profit pursuits to solve social problems (Eaves & McGuire, 2018). Within social entrepreneurship, people are motivated by social gain and are highly innovative. There is lower levels of self-interest while having higher levels of risk taking and social conscience.

Talking about entrepreneurship and problems at a global level, as entrepreneurs people need build, evolve, and more importantly challenge current thinking. Entrepreneurs need to re-examine assumptions and opinions of current systems and model that establish entrepreneurship. Getting entrepreneurship to address global problems can be complex and become interconnected. There needs to be an understanding of global and local ecosystems to create, improve, and sustain current and future endeavors (Eaves & McGuire, 2018).

Leadership within an entrepreneurial business work place is different and requires more than just “leading” people. According to our textbook Nick Petrie conducted a study on leadership development and said, “There is a transition occurring from the old paradigm in which leadership resided in a person or role, to a new one in which leadership is a collective process that is spread throughout networks of people” (DuBrin, 2014). Leadership is not a one-person job, there is no leadership without anyone to inspire and motivate, it’s all about collaboration.

There is also the issue of leadership versus management. A manager can lead, and a leader manages, but a leader deals more with interpersonal relationships and are more visionary. Another question is what roles do leaders play in entrepreneurial situations? The answer is there are many different roles to play and combinations roles is key to being successful in different entrepreneurial situations. Some roles can include being a negotiator, a coach and motivator, team builder, team player, entrepreneur, and more. Finally, the concept of transformational leadership is important in entrepreneurship. A definition from the textbook is a transformational leader is one who brings about positive, major changes in an organization(DuBrin, 2014). A transformational leader needs to be visionary, and to be a successful leadership in entrepreneurship, having a vision and a purpose is key.

Arias, I., Skibsted, J., De Cuyper, L., & Ziskind, J. (2018, November). How can we make entrepreneurship serve the greater good? Retrieved from World Economic Forum: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/11/can-entrepreneurship-serve-the-greater-good/

Eaves, D., & McGuire, B. (2018, October). 2018 State of Digital Transformation. Retrieved from Harvard Kennedy School Belfer Center: https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/2018-state-digital-transformation

4th Industrial Revolution – Anas

The fourth industrial revolution is what defines the digitized world we live in that is specifically marked by the advance and the development of technology. Through the cyber-physical systems, the Internet of Things and the Internet of Systems this revolution has changed the perception of things such as ways of life, organizations and how people relate to each other in hope to make life easier. According to Bawany, this fourth revolution is what enables new technologies to evolve combining physical, digital and biological worlds and so forth allows them to impact all industries, disciplines and economies (Bawany, 2017). Bernard Marr, in his article for Forbes, insisted that the promise of the fourth industrial revolution is to raise income levels of the world’s population alongside with the improvement of the quality of life through a more connected and smarter world (Marr, 2018).

However, organizations who are seeking success or those who are willing to maintain their place in the market should be aware of the impact and changes that the fourth industry revolution might bring in order to prepare themselves and anticipate the challenges, or even threats, that may face them in both the short and the long run. That is why Leaders, as it is their role, must keep in mind these challenges and bring necessary changes to their organization to reshape it so that it will conform with the new way of doing business as applied by this industry revolution. For this to happen, Sattar Bawany argued that leaders must release themselves from the traditional linear thinking as well as the crises that demands all their attention. More than that, he also added that leaders must always be sensitive towards how technology is affecting our economic, social, cultural and human environments (Bawany, 2017). In addition, Bernard Marr not only agrees with Bawany and that in fact leaders must always be aware of the impact of technology development, but he also suggested that organizations must all try harder to be smarter and connected by investing more on their data analyzing capabilities and technical infrastructure alongside with developing them (Marr, 2018).

Bawany, S. (2017). The Future Of Leadership In The Fourth Industrial Revolution: Importance of cognitive readiness and emotional & social intelligence skills for IR 4.0. Leadership Excellence Essentials.

Marr, B. (2018, August 13). The 4th Industrial Revolution Is Here – Are You Ready? Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2018/08/13/the-4th-industrial-revolution-is-here-are-you-ready/#18429f36628b

Digital communication: Yogen Rai

Digital Communication is a tool for communicating with one another. It is a digitally encoded signals which is transferred electronically from sender to the receivers. Some examples of digital systems which we use in daily life are mobile phones, internet and so on.

In today’s world communication without digital nature can’t be thought of. It allows connecting each other more conveniently than ever before was. We spend so much time on internet that texting, and all the communications are being done on phone or through social website. Most of the people are nowadays live super active in digital world. There are various apps which has helped in communication with family, friends and business clients and coworkers. This has brought up freedom of communication in the world.

Digital world is constantly changing. For example, few years and until today emails were one of the most used for communication but it’s been taken over by social media apps and text messages. Number of people growing IM (instant messaging) are growing every day. It is growing in such a way that the day is coming that it will overtake emails. Even businesses these days use SMS to notify their customers and grow broader.

Organizations that are more willing to utilize digital leadership usually keeping in mind for communication, creating new ideas and will to explore new process. Digital leaders always find the ways with Information technology to be more competitive on organization level. This surely is helping to be responsible to what consumer wants and changing the business necessities.

In the beginning phase of Facebook, only pictures could be shared now is the videos and soon it is going to have virtual reality. In the never-ending development of the digital communication system, “The future of communication is going to be telepathy”. (Mark Zuckerberg). A person will just be communicating with thinking of something in their mind and his friends will be immediately be able to know it.

Overall today is the era of digitalized world. Business leaders will need to be constantly updated about the new applications and gadgets. By utilizing new technologies, two of the core things: 1. Communicating and 2. Acting appropriate to the situation is going to be a lot convenient and effective in the fast-changing business environment.

References:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/14/zuckerberg-telepathy-facebook-live-video-seinfeld

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/07/01/mark-zuckerberg-says-the-future-of-communication-is-telepathy-heres-how-that-would-actually-work/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.fa4abe18412a

Conclusion-Wenyue

Since the age that we live in is one that relies heavily on technology, it is essential to look at the future through the lenses of technology and come up with a suitable way forward for the future of business. The future has prospects of technological involvement and thus the need to have all leaderships conversant with technology for the future of business transactions.

We found that it is necessary to consider the application of science and technology for the expansion of cognitive and physical human capabilities. This is expected to enhance the aptitude of humans in their roles as leaders in the future. Enhancement also hopes to achieve the transfer of intrinsic leadership qualities in people that did not have these inherent qualities. This dream gives scientists the power to create an ideal leader with all-around capabilities.

Artificial intelligence, on the other hand, has raised legitimate concerns about the possibility of it to replace human labor in the workforce. Scientists have prospected on the possible benefits of robots with artificial intelligence, but people are still skeptical about the whole matter. The prospects of the future look to take technical tasks away from managers and delegate them to robots, which might be a viable option on the face of it but how about considering an actual human being for the same task.

Further, in entrepreneurial entities leadership is considered as a job for all the members of the collaborating business people. The future is also looking into the vision and purpose of leadership as the critical aspects of administration. Innovative technological leadership of entrepreneurship inspires transformative leadership. The future of business is in the revolutionization of the existing systems and the inception of a digitized world, in which the prospects of business are higher, and the output will be higher even as the quality of production increases. In the new age, communication is digitized and simplified that a person does not need to be physically present to receive correspondence — efficient and quicker communication guarantees optimum productivity. The technological age of business comes with plenty of advantages and disadvantages that must be considered when employing any leadership style.

Cite this page

Technological development. (2021, May 11). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/technological-development/

"Technological development." PapersOwl.com , 11 May 2021, https://papersowl.com/examples/technological-development/

PapersOwl.com. (2021). Technological development . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/technological-development/ [Accessed: 25 Apr. 2024]

"Technological development." PapersOwl.com, May 11, 2021. Accessed April 25, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/technological-development/

"Technological development," PapersOwl.com , 11-May-2021. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/technological-development/. [Accessed: 25-Apr-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2021). Technological development . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/technological-development/ [Accessed: 25-Apr-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Advertisement

Science, Technology and Innovation as Social Goods for Development: Rethinking Research Capacity Building from Sen’s Capabilities Approach

• Original Paper
• Open access
• Published: 01 March 2018
• Volume 25 , pages 671–692, ( 2019 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Maru Mormina   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5836-8989 1  

76k Accesses

41 Citations

7 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Science and technology are key to economic and social development, yet the capacity for scientific innovation remains globally unequally distributed. Although a priority for development cooperation, building or developing research capacity is often reduced in practice to promoting knowledge transfers, for example through North–South partnerships. Research capacity building/development tends to focus on developing scientists’ technical competencies through training, without parallel investments to develop and sustain the socioeconomic and political structures that facilitate knowledge creation. This, the paper argues, significantly contributes to the scientific divide between developed and developing countries more than any skills shortage. Using Charles Taylor’s concept of irreducibly social goods, the paper extends Sen’s Capabilities Approach beyond its traditional focus on individual entitlements to present a view of scientific knowledge as a social good and the capability to produce it as a social capability. Expanding this capability requires going beyond current fragmented approaches to research capacity building to holistically strengthen the different social, political and economic structures that make up a nation’s innovation system. This has implications for the interpretation of human rights instruments beyond their current focus on access to knowledge and for focusing science policy and global research partnerships to design approaches to capacity building/development beyond individual training/skills building.

Similar content being viewed by others

The impact of entrepreneurship on economic, social and environmental welfare and its determinants: a systematic review

Implementing the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals in international business

Barriers and facilitators of university-industry collaboration for research, development and innovation: a systematic review

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

The ability to generate scientific and technological knowledge (S&T) and translate it into new products or processes is a key instrument of economic growth and development. Yet, S&T, and societies’ capacity to produce it, is unequally distributed. In light of this inequality, this article offers a normative analysis on the global distribution of S&T capacity. The purpose is two-fold: first, to outline an ethical framework for evaluating different arrangements for the creation and sharing of scientific knowledge globally; and second, to inform policy and funding strategies for developing scientific capacity in low and middle-income countries (LMIC). Footnote 1

Lofty aspirations to enhance scientific research and upgrade the technological capabilities of LMIC (UN 2015 ) has led to the adoption of research capacity building (RCB) Footnote 2 as a cornerstone of international development assistance (Colglazier 2015 ). Yet, concrete efforts to empower these countries to develop their capacity to produce rather than consume knowledge have been piecemeal. This is unsurprising, given that the concept of capacity remains under-theorised and open to diverse interpretations. Current understandings of capacity are largely Western-centric and rooted on ideas borrowed from disciplines such as performance management, and organisational development (Morgan 2006 ), but also from left-leaning ideals of empowerment, participation and community development (Eade 1997 ). Yet, a clear definition of what constitutes capacity is missing, and consequently, also the frameworks that can help with its assessment, management, monitoring and evaluation (Morgan 2006 ). As a result, practitioners vary considerably in their approaches to capacity building: for some it is as a pure human resources issue, whereas for others is about organisational change and general management. And whilst most international development organisations espouse the basic principle of capacity building as empowerment, in practice it is often operationalised as a means to solve practical problems (ibid).

Lack of conceptual clarity is also seen in donors’ approaches to RCB. Research investments in LMIC aim primarily to the production of research outputs (Enoch 2015 ), often by high income countries (HIC) teams in collaboration with LMIC researchers. RCB is often seen as an ethical requirement to level the playing field between collaborators with unequal capacities and resources for research (Parker and Kingori 2016 ), and thus the focus is strongly on skills development of local scientists. This approach to RCB is popular because it is easier to implement, measure and evaluate, but gives insufficient attention to the wider and long term social factors that help or hinder local knowledge production. Yet, if science is to be harnessed to promote social and economic progress in LMIC, RCB must be viewed as integral to development strategies and approached more holistically at a macro, systems level, not just at a micro, individual level. However, taking such a systems approach begs some normative questions: What is required to build scientific capacity? And whose capacities need to be built?

Efforts to address these questions have been sparse. Some have attempted to link S&T to human rights instruments, specifically Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), which promote universal access to scientific research and its benefits (Shaver 2010 ; Plomer 2013 ; Chapman and Wyndham 2013 ). These articles have been used to advance two basic ideas: first, that in order to enhance LMIC’s capacity to use S&T for development, these countries must be able to fairly access and benefit from existing knowledge. This creates entitlements to education, access to scientific publications, the promotion of scientific cooperation and international exchanges (Shaheed 2012 ), as well as the lifting of intellectual property (IP) restrictions to utilise knowledge (Shaver 2010 ). Here, the focus is on knowledge transfers from HIC to LMIC with little consideration of the latter’s systemic ability to utilise knowledge, and the relevance of such knowledge to LMIC’s specific needs. Second, that scientific capacity is a good to be distributed to individuals alone. This reduces RCB to strengthening scientists’ technical competencies through education and training without parallel investments to develop and sustain the structures wherein knowledge is created. Thus, whilst the human rights language has the normative teeth to impact upon priority setting and resource allocations decisions by the international community, its usefulness to solve the capacity problem in LMIC is less clear.

This article moves away from discourses of access and knowledge transfers by positing RCB as a tool for knowledge creation. It then makes a normative case for a system approach to RCB built upon a notion of scientific knowledge as a social good , i.e. a good that can only be possessed by and benefit society as a whole. It considers the distribution of this social good (and the capability to produce it) through the lens of the Capability Approach (CA) (Sen 2001 ), expanded to include societies and their institutions. This helps focus not only on the interests of scientists and beneficiaries of the scientific enterprise (patients, consumers, etc.) but on the social structures and processes necessary for the creation and utilisation of knowledge, i.e. on systems. Therefore, an entitlement to a social capability to produce scientific knowledge requires expanding the scope of RCB from a mere empowerment of individuals to the strengthening of the social, political and economic structures that constitute the scaffolding of a nation’s research and innovation system.

The first part of this article critiques traditional understandings of scientific knowledge as an asset, distributed to and possessed by individuals, which in turn determine normative stances and practical approaches to RCB. The second part moves the focus of analysis from knowledge assets to knowledge capabilities , using Sen’s Capability Approach (CA) as a framework. The article argues that scientific knowledge cannot be construed as an individual good in the traditional Senian view (a feature of and valuable to individuals) but as a social good (a feature of and valuable to societies as a whole). If scientific knowledge is a social good, the capacity to produce it is a social capability that emerges from and depends on the social and institutional structures that constitute the condition for knowledge creation. It concludes by briefly examining the implications of this move, outlining how societies’ claim to a capability for producing scientific knowledge requires a re-conceptualisation of RCB as a multilevel approach to strengthen research systems and the societies in which they are embedded.

Scientific Knowledge as an Asset and Research Capacity as Individual - Centred

Knowledge (of which scientific knowledge is a particular type) is mostly discussed in the knowledge management literature as the intellectual capital of organisations, with a focus on the processes involved in its production (Rowley 2007 ). Much of this theoretical work builds upon the Data–Information–Knowledge–Wisdom hierarchy (DIKW), a widely recognised model credited to Russell Ackoff ( 1989 ). DIKW describes a tiered albeit fluid relationship between data, information, knowledge and wisdom: data refers to elements of an observation or recorded descriptions that are disorganised and therefore have no meaning; data is used to create information (data interpreted and organised to convey meaning); information is used to create knowledge and knowledge is used to create wisdom (Rowley 2007 ). Knowledge and wisdom are less well defined, though the former seems to refer to a process of accumulated learning internal to the individual that results from synthesising information from various sources and over time (Keri et al. 2006 ). Wisdom is hardly discussed in the literature (Rowley 2007 ) but implies the application of judgement upon knowledge in order to guide action. Despite lack of consensus on the above definitions and the processes that convert one into the other (Frické 2009 ; Zins 2007 ), the DIKW model is useful to highlight data, information and knowledge as distinct constructs. This distinction is, as explained below, not only semantic but normative. This article is not concerned with a capability to use, produce or share scientific data or information, as this has been done by others (e.g. Bezuidenhout et al. 2017 ) but a capability to generate scientific knowledge, here understood as a process of synthesis and accumulated learning based upon open, systematic and objective empirical observations of the world.

Scientific knowledge underpins much of the technological capacities that fuel the knowledge economy: production and services based on knowledge - intensive activities that contribute to an accelerated pace of technological and scientific advance (Powell and Snellman 2004 ). Because of this increased reliance on intellectual capabilities for wealth production, scientific knowledge is considered an intangible asset necessary for development. Countries must be able to use and exploit knowledge to drive social and economic progress, and this in turn determines approaches to RCB largely aimed at transferring knowledge at the micro level of the individual, a focus the following sections seek to challenge.

Intangible Assets: Consuming Information or Producing Knowledge?

In orthodox economic theories, scientific knowledge is considered a key intangible asset that drives economic development within a country (Romer 1986 ) and reduces technological and economic differences between countries (Abramovitz 1986 ), thus, a private good to be appropriated and commercialised for economic benefit (ibid). Yet, it, can also be said to be a public good, whose use is non-rivalrous (all can use it) and non-excludable (use by one actor does not preclude other actors from benefitting) (Stiglitz 1999 ). This framing has been used to spur action to bridge the knowledge divide between countries by ensuring universal access to essential knowledge and technologies, through initiatives such as IP reforms (Shaver 2010 ), open science/data sharing (Contreras 2010 ), or open access publishing (Chan and Costa 2005 ). A closer scrutiny of these discourses, however, suggests that what is often referred to as knowledge aligns more closely with the definitions of data and information given above. In fact, the knowledge assets contained in patents or scientific publications is a particular type of existing knowledge that can be expressed and shared through formal language, i.e. codified (Polanyi 1966 ) which, because it is external to the agent’s cognitive processes of decoding and interpreting, some argue is simply information (Johnson et al. 2002 ). This type of codified knowledge/information is often assumed to be relevant and applicable to the needs of developing countries and directly transferrable to these contexts (Chan and Costa 2005 ). This is not always the case, as scientific knowledge and derived technologies are purpose-driven and context-dependent (Fu et al. 2011 ). As the bulk of the world’s scientific output is produced by scientists associated with institutions in HIC (Mazloumian et al. 2013 ) and in response to the specific needs of those nations, access to knowledge by LMIC is not straightforward. It requires developing absorptive and adaptive capabilities necessary for its acquisition and subsequent translation into technologies adapted to local conditions.

Thus, construing scientific knowledge as an asset can result in a limited focus on simply transferring and consuming information, a process not always costless. Undoubtedly, facilitating access to scientific information is important and necessary to propel technological development, particularly in the case of innovations entailing leapfrogging, but not sufficient. Much of the knowledge that underpins the innovation process is tacit , not easily embodied, codifiable or readily transferable (Polanyi 1966 ). Tacit (or informal) knowledge is unwritten, unspoken, and based on individuals’ experiences, intuitions, observations, internalised information, and above all interactions. It is this kind of knowledge that results in new or improved products, operational processes or approaches to a social service, i.e. innovation (Frascati-Manual 2015 ). Codification makes existing knowledge/information easily transferrable; yet, in the process, the less tangible aspects of knowledge are lost, and for this reason new tacit knowledge is less mobile. This explains the concentration of knowledge generation capabilities around innovation hubs , and the widening knowledge divide between HIC and LMIC despite globalisation’s erosion of borders and the pervasiveness of information technologies (Gertler 2003 ).

The importance of innovation rarely comes under the scrutiny of global theories of justice, and when it does, the moral discourse appears more concerned with the distribution of the products of S&T innovation rather than the capacity to innovate (Papaioannou 2011 , 2014 ). This capacity depends not only on the ability to absorb codified information but crucially to produce tacit forms of knowledge. This ability remains largely within the domain of HIC (Mazloumian et al. 2013 ), particularly with regards to resource intensive knowledge activities (e.g. genomics). This is not a dismissal of the considerable amount of scientific research and innovation that is currently conducted in LMIC; it is the case that a number of them have embraced S&T as a path to development, though many are left behind. If developing societies are not to be excluded from the benefits of S&T, the geographies of knowledge must be rebalanced through approaches that pay enhanced attention to increasing access and exposure to scientific information whilst also fostering homegrown processes and structures that facilitate the production, translation and utilisation of tacit , situated forms of knowledge.

Research Capacity: A Focus on Individuals

A second assumption is that scientific knowledge, whether as a private or public good, must be possessed and exploited by individuals (scientists) and must benefit individuals (patients, consumers, etc.). Justice, situated at the micro level, is achieved when individuals can equitably access and benefit from scientific knowledge, as proponents of the human rights approach discussed earlier would contend. A strong focus on individuals also underpins the position of Timmermann ( 2014 ). Grounding his argument in the concept of human capabilities, Timmermann suggests that justice demands not only the distribution of knowledge, possessed and consumed as any other good, but equitable participation by individuals in the co-creation of knowledge. This requires building capacity (of individual scientists) where it is lacking (ibid).

Though not all, most approaches to RCB have a strong focus on developing individual skills, perhaps because these are much easier to implement and evaluate (Vallejo and Wehn 2016 ). RCB is usually delivered through HIC–LMIC partnerships (Velho 2004 ), which are generally established not for the purpose of developing capacity but of achieving specific scientific goals—Mode 1 model of knowledge production according to the typology of Gibbons et al. ( 1994 ). As a consequence, RCB becomes embedded and operationalised within specific scientific projects and often reduced to building the technical competencies of individual scientists, most commonly through education and training. This approach to RCB often assumes a straightforward progression from scientific research (knowledge production) to innovation (its application into new technologies) and to development (economic and/or social): input in the form of trained scientists will result in greater knowledge production, more and better technological innovation and faster development. However, not only is this assumption of linearity unrealistic, it also overlooks the systemic nature of knowledge creation and innovation. The pursuit of scientific knowledge is fundamentally a collective process: individuals use their expertise and collaborate in a highly organised division of labour (within and across research teams) to collect data in meaningful arrangements in order to obtain information and produce the tacit forms of knowledge that underpin innovation. This suggests that whilst individuals may have scientific knowledge (in the form of accumulated learning), they alone cannot produce it (Cheon 2014 ), but must participate in a complex web of interactions across many different boundaries: disciplinary, geographic, economic. Moreover, downstream translation of scientific knowledge into technological innovation requires further interplays to enable the transfer of knowledge from centres of “knowledge creation” (typically universities) to “centres of knowledge application” (typically industry) where it becomes added value through its embedding into design (of new products, processes or services). It is important to note however, that this is a non-linear relationship with multiple iterations, feedback loops and failures (Lundvall 2007 ).

Thus, if the process of knowledge creation that underpins innovation rarely takes place outside the specialised formal and informal networks, whether physical or virtual, that constitute a scientific community, then what matters is not so much the strength of individual actors (researchers and research partnerships, universities, firms, markets, governments, etc.) but the connections between them (Velho 2004 ). From this follows that whilst ensuring equitable access to knowledge and a greater supply of trained scientists are both essential to create a critical mass of expertise in a LMIC, this alone does not generate knowledge. An effective approach to RCB must recognise that the creation of scientific knowledge is bound to the social, economic and political institutions, practices and norms that sustain it, to such extent that the right of individuals to access scientific knowledge and participate in its production (Timmermann 2014 ) cannot be asserted without also recognising the intrinsic moral importance of the structures where knowledge is created. The production of scientific knowledge is inherently a social phenomenon situated within the complex enmeshing of social, economic and political relations and for this reason cannot be promoted only at the individual level.

In sum, the argument is twofold: first, what matters from the perspective of justice is not only the fair distribution of existing knowledge and technological innovations, but the fair distribution of the capability to produce scientific knowledge and translate it into new products of innovation. Second, this capability is not a capability of individuals but of societies. The first part is, hopefully, uncontentious. After all, this is the conviction underlying the many RCB initiatives which ultimately aim to grow local scientific capacity. However, they do so instrumentally and mostly focusing on individual capabilities without addressing the social context and institutions that condition individuals’ actions and interactions. The contention here is that only by recognising the inextricable connection between science and the social structures from which it emerges can we develop ways to enhance society’s capacity for creating scientific knowledge. And when we do that, the moral unit of attention is not just the individual but the society.

Two Epistemic Transitions: From Assets to Capabilities and from Individuals to Systems

If viewing scientific knowledge merely as an asset to which individuals alone are entitled leads to narrow and ultimately inefficient RCB strategies, perhaps it is necessary to re-calibrate our understanding of scientific knowledge and its normative dimensions. This section, therefore, moves the focus from knowledge assets to knowledge capabilities and from individuals to the wider social factors that facilitate or hinder knowledge creation processes, i.e. to institutions and systems.

The term capability is perhaps one of the most ubiquitous and ambiguous in the academic literature. It is mainly used in the business literature as organisational capabilities to refer to those intangible assets that enable organisations to manage resources and gain a competitive advantage (Ulrich and Smallwood 2004 ). Perhaps more relevant to the present discussion, the notion of capability is also used (although less extensively) in the economic literature, notably by Abramovitz ( 1986 ), who coined the notion of social absorptive capabilities : people’s technological competences (loosely measured by years of education) and the social, economic and political institutions that influence those competences. For Abramovitz, the rate of technological convergence (the speed at which less technologically developed countries catch up with those more technologically advanced) depends on the social capabilities of a nation. Similar to Abramovitz, Furman et al. ( 2002 ) also apply the term at the country level to explain countries’ differential abilities to innovate and commercialise new technologies ( National Innovation Capability theory). National innovation capabilities do not depend solely on a country’s innovation infrastructure and related outputs, but fundamentally on the environment that determines the innovation process, particularly public policy (e.g. regarding research expenditure, commercialisation, etc.). These different theories point to a notion of capabilities as the ability of firms/countries to do something worthwhile , a process enabled by having access to knowledge assets and influenced by external social or political factors. However, these theories do not explain knowledge creation processes in the first place and above all, because they are mostly descriptive, they do not assist with the normative evaluation of arrangements for the creation of knowledge.

The notion of capabilities proposed by Sen ( 2001 ) allows shifting the informational basis from command over knowledge assets to the ability to produce those assets. Sen’s Capabilities Approach (CA), however, is firmly rooted in the individual, although many have expanded it to acknowledge the existence of social (collective) capabilities (Evans 2002 ; Stewart 2005 ; Deneulin 2008 ; Ibrahim 2006 ; Fernández-Baldor et al. 2012 ). It is from this notion of social capabilities that the CA represents the most appropriate framework to articulate the moral relevance of scientific knowledge and evaluate the social and economic arrangements that impact on societies’ ability to produce it. The remaining sections of this article therefore outline the CA and the rationale for including social capabilities. The article then places scientific knowledge within the domain of social capabilities and sketches some of the implications for RCB.

The Capabilities Approach and its Social Dimension

The CA is an evaluative framework for the assessment of individual wellbeing and social arrangements, and for this reason it is widely used in the design of policies. For the CA, social and economic development is about enlarging what people can be and do, in contrast with other development paradigms that focus on maximising utility or satisfying basic needs by supplying essential commodities (Fukuda-Parr 2003 ). The CA shifts the evaluation of development from the commodities people have or lack to the opportunities open to them. This is obviously relevant for the evaluation of technological progress, which does not depend as much on access to information assets (scientific publications, etc.) as on the capacity to produce locally and socially valuable scientific knowledge, as already argued.

Central to the CA is the notion of capabilities and functionings : capabilities are the real opportunities open to individuals (and, as it will be discussed below, societies) to realise different functionings or achievements that they recognise as important. Capabilities, thus, refer to a particular conception of freedom as the ability to achieve the kind of life one has reason to value. Capabilities are what is effectively possible given individuals’ internal traits and external conditions; functionings are what is actually realised. This distinction is important, as it sets the CA apart from other theories of justice that consider the distribution of utilities (Robbins 1933 ), primary goods (Rawls 1971 ), or resources (Dworkin 1981 ) of intrinsic moral importance. For these approaches only means/resources are inherently valuable; non-material considerations are of no moral relevance. Thus, access to scientific publications, removing IP protections or participating in equitable research partnerships are the ends of distributive justice, but without taking full account of the factors affecting the ability of societies to convert these goods into useful scientific knowledge. By focusing on capabilities as ends, the CA acknowledges the existence and moral relevance of material and non-material constraints to development, i.e. the forces that help or hinder one’s capacity to convert capabilities into functionings, opportunities into achievement. In Sen’s terminology, these are conversion factors .

A key feature of the CA is its strong moral individualism, which emphasises individuals as the sole subjects of moral concern. For Sen, states of affairs must be evaluated only by their effect upon individuals. This is not to say that the CA does not recognise the importance of groups, institutions and other social arrangements ( collectives ) in enhancing or hindering individual freedoms; however, their roles can be sensibly evaluated in the light of their contributions to our freedom (Sen 2001 ), i.e. as conversion factors. Thus, for Sen, collectives enter the evaluative space only insofar they affect individual wellbeing. Many, however, disagree with such instrumentalisation (e.g. Evans 2002 ; Ibrahim 2006 ; Stewart 2005 ; Deneulin 2008 ; Fernández-Baldor et al. 2012 ), arguing that collectives are not just a means for realising individual freedoms; they are constitutive to those freedoms.

Asserting the constitutive importance of collectives rests upon a fundamentally relational conception of individual freedom: a social phenomenon defined against its specific historic, social or political context (Otano-Jiménez 2015 ). The individual focus of the CA offers a robust defence of individual freedom but cannot help to identify the processes necessary to promote those freedoms. A relational conception of freedom, instead, provides an analytical lens to understand social commitment to individual freedom. Here, the starting point of analysis is not so much the individual but the forms of solidarity that enable the expansion of individual capabilities through the establishment of just social institutions (ibid) . Such a broadened focus requires ancillary concepts such as social capabilities : capabilities that can only be achieved by individuals through their participation in social institutions ( collectives ). Social capabilities emerge from the exercise of collective agency in ways that are more than the sum of individual capabilities (Stewart 2005 ), and their benefits cannot be achieved by individuals alone (Ibrahim 2006 ).

The idea of social capabilities remains contested (Robeyns 2005 ; Alkire 2008 ; Cleaver 1999 ). A key concern is that any attempt to move the focus away from the individual may overlook the dynamics of inequality and exploitation within groups/societies that may negatively impact upon individual freedoms (Cleaver 1999 ). Social capabilities enable the achievement of goals that cannot be realised by individuals alone but can also lead to exclusion (e.g. ethnic discrimination) or bring about negative consequences for individuals (e.g. oppression of women or minorities within groups). Thus, while some see collectives as enabling and intrinsic to human flourishing (Ibrahim 2013 ) others see them as potentially repressive and thus instrumentally valuable only insofar they do not oppress individual agency. In other words, both Sen and his critics recognise the importance of collectives and their relationship with individual freedom, but they disagree (1) on the nature of this relationship—instrumental or intrinsic-, and (2) their potential to oppress or enhance those freedoms. Before proceeding to consider S&T as a collective capability, let us briefly address these two disagreements.

The rationale for considering collectives intrinsically valuable beyond their contribution to the lives of individuals can be found in the concept of irreducibly social goods (Taylor 1995 ): goods that cannot be reduced to individual acts or choices since those acts and choices are only possible through collective agency. Language and culture are paradigmatic examples of irreducibly social goods, as they cannot be reduced to individual utterances but only exist within a set of shared norms and codes shaped by collective agency. For Gore ( 1997 ), institutional arrangements are also irreducibly social goods, since they are the codes and practices that constrain and enable human activity, and at the same time they are themselves constituted through that activity (ibid). Irreducibly social goods, such as language, culture, institutional arrangements and, as it will be argued shortly, knowledge, cannot come into being through individual agency (they are not the goods of individuals but of society). They have value beyond the individual because they do not benefit individuals but society as a whole (they are not goods for individuals but for society). Failing to recognise their intrinsic value by incorporating them in the evaluation of development only as instrumental to individual wellbeing is failing to recognise the intimate connection between the individual and society. Acknowledging social goods as intrinsic to individual wellbeing adds an important layer to the evaluation of states of affairs. This point is important: it does not mean that individual wellbeing should be subsumed within collectives but that both should enter the evaluative domain.

If irreducibly social goods are constituted through the activities of individuals in ways that are more than the sum of the parts, the social capability to produce such goods is also constituted through the capabilities of individuals in ways that are more than just the sum of individual capabilities. For example, the capability for democratic processes depends upon individuals having the freedom to vote and express their views without fear, yet cannot be reduced to these individual freedoms: it requires concerted action. Social capabilities, thus, emerge from the interconnected actions of individuals (and their capabilities) within societies. Collective capabilities do not exist without individual capabilities. At the same time, individual freedoms can only be understood against the collective capability that enables them.

There remains of course the issue of inequality and oppression. Proponents of social capabilities have yet to provide a satisfactory solution to the tension between the individual and the collective, for a focus on the latter can obscure internal dynamics of inequity that oppress individual freedoms (for example, when empowering groups suppresses minority voices or leads to inequities in the way interests are aggregated). However, the same holds for the individualistic view too, for example, when enhancing one capability leads to inequality with regards to other capabilities. One may endorse compulsory primary school education because being able to read and write is a basic capability. Yet, in poor societies, this may disproportionately affect households that critically depend on child labour for their subsistence (another basic capability). Thus, when capabilities conflict, a focus on the individual does not necessarily lead to enhancement of individual freedoms. On the other hand, the inextricable link between social and individual capabilities means that the more the latter are enhanced, the more the former are empowered, and vice-versa. In other words, a well-functioning society is only possible when all individuals are empowered through equality of opportunity. At the same time, individual empowerment necessitates the existence of strong social institutions. Acknowledging the importance of social capabilities need not be acritical but requires an evaluative framework to determine which ones strengthen the process of development and expansion of freedoms and which do not, just as evaluative frameworks are needed to distinguish between good and bad individual capabilities.

Scientific Knowledge as an Irreducibly Social Good

Despite recognising the importance of S&T for development and its positive and negative impact on political and economic relations within and between countries, much of the S&T literature lacks a normative direction. Normative discourses, on the other hand, have engaged with S&T mostly from the perspective of its potential harms and benefits to individuals. Distributive justice concerns have mostly been raised in the context of access to existing scientific knowledge—see, for example, the work of Pogge ( 2011 ) on access to essential medicines—rather than on the capacity to generate such knowledge. This article shifts the focus of analysis from access to knowledge to capabilities, here considered not at the micro level of individual empowerment but at the macro level of systems and institutions strengthening. Such a move is achieved by construing scientific knowledge as an irreducibly social good , and the capability to produce it as a social capability that depends upon the existence of adequate social institutions. It is important to consider research capacity holistically and as a currency of justice if S&T policies are to have a substantial and lasting impact on development.

Sen’s CA helps to articulate the claim that equitably sharing in the benefits of S&T requires not so much the distribution of data, information or existing codified knowledge but the distribution of the capability to produce and use new scientific knowledge (tacit at first and subsequently codified) as a pre-requisite for human and economic development. Such a capability is a social capability because scientific knowledge is an irreducibly social good: it cannot be reduced to individual acts of learning but is situated within a scientific culture (codes, institutions and practices) and co-evolves with it. That is, scientific knowledge determines and is determined by its specific social context (e.g. when social values determine what scientific questions count as important, and the answers to those questions in turn shape social values). In this sense, scientific knowledge is an irreducible feature of society and not of individuals. Scientific knowledge (especially basic or non-applied knowledge) is not instrumental to individual wellbeing and cannot be judged through its effects on individuals since it cannot be directly applied to them (e.g. understanding the relationship between folic acid, mood and cognitive function is of no direct benefit to individuals but can help the scientific community to develop effective treatments for depression or dementia). In this sense, scientific knowledge is a social good, valuable to society as a whole insofar it expands its opportunities for developing the processes and applications (vaccines, medicines, etc.) necessary for advancing individual wellbeing.

Thus, if scientific knowledge is an irreducibly social good (more than the sum of individual research efforts and benefits society rather than individuals), the capability for knowledge creation is best conceived as a social capability. It creates a critical mass of expertise that is essential for innovation and is valuable to society for its self-realisation. This has a completely different set of implications from an evaluation of knowledge production simply in terms of its contribution to individual capabilities. In the classical Senian approach, the value of scientific knowledge would be relevant only insofar it improves the lives of individuals, i.e. as an ingredient of individual human wellbeing. The upshot is that only knowledge that is directly applicable would count as valuable, which automatically disqualifies most of the scientific enterprise. As a social capability, however, the ability to produce scientific knowledge is valuable beyond its actual benefits to single individuals; it expands society’s innovation capital, thus diversifying and widening the range of possible solutions to its specific problems. In other words, scientific knowledge is part of a nation’s intellectual capital (competencies, knowledge, skills) that sustains development. Seen from the perspective of the CA, therefore, scientific knowledge creation becomes part of the capability set that can empower developing societies to redraw the boundaries of development and as such it cannot be construed as an individual good.

There are of course, two important objections to the above argument. First, construing scientific knowledge as a social good valuable to society as a whole can mask potential uses in ways that hamper individual wellbeing (e.g. when scientific knowledge is used in warfare), or that advance the wellbeing of certain individuals/groups over others. For example, in highly stratified societies, the production of scientific knowledge may be disproportionately directed towards addressing the health needs of higher socioeconomic groups, thereby neglecting minorities. Yet, while this criticism is a potential limitation of the present argument, it is important to draw a distinction between the capability to produce scientific knowledge (which needs to be evaluated at the level of society) and the application of such knowledge to develop technologies, medicines, etc., that advance (or not) individual wellbeing. As pointed out above, collective capabilities exist alongside individual capabilities as two sides of the same coin. Sen acknowledges the existence of valuable and non-valuable capabilities (Stewart 2005 ); in the same vein the existence of good and bad social capabilities can be posited according to how these affect individuals within their societies. Thus, whilst the capability to produce scientific knowledge requires collective empowerment (in the form of policies, institutions, etc.), how such capability is used must be morally evaluated in terms of equitable individual empowerment if the abovementioned issues of discrimination, corruption and nepotism are to be avoided.

Second, construing scientific knowledge as a feature of society, i.e. as an endeavour that requires collective agency, does shine a light on the need to strengthen the institutions and structures for knowledge creation through a holistic approach to RCB. However, it can also downplay the critical role that individual agency has in the process of knowledge creation and thus the importance of creating the right set of conditions for individuals to flourish through meaningful and fair participation in the collective production of knowledge (Timmermann 2017 ). In other words, focusing on institutional strengthening can lead to treating individual scientists mainly as contributors to the process of knowledge production overlooking the fact that they also benefit from it. Though these are important concerns, they stem from positing a false dichotomy between individuals and society. If, as argued before, social capabilities depend upon the existence of individual capabilities and vice-versa, strengthening social institutions requires paying attention to how individuals are empowered and benefit from the production of knowledge. Construing knowledge as a social good calls for a holistic approach to RCB aimed at creating enabling environments for S&T through adequate institutional arrangements. These must include opportunities for individual scientists’ development (e.g. training), as well as incentives that reward collegiality (for example through data sharing), rigour and academic excellence (Rappert and Bezuidenhout 2016 ). The relationship between individual and social capabilities should not be seen as exclusory but reciprocal. Individuals’ scientific capabilities depend upon social arrangements (e.g. public policies on education, employment, and commercialisation of scientific findings, participation in scientific networks, etc.). They are socially dependent individual capabilities (Davis 2015 ). At the same time, a social capability to produce knowledge crucially rests upon individuals’ commitment to the scientific community and the scientific endeavour. That is, they are individually dependent social capabilities (ibid) . For this reason, the dichotomy between individual and social capabilities is fallacious (at least at the theoretical level), for both are interdependent.

On the operational level, however, individual and collective capabilities can clash, for a focus on the collective can obscure inequities in the allocation of resources among members of a scientific community, as well as discriminatory practices resulting in the reinforcement of scientific elites, inequitable access to opportunities for education and training or even exploitation of under-recognised categories of scientists/workers (Timmermann 2017 ). For a collective capability to produce knowledge can be achieved through institutional arrangements that advantage some and disadvantage others, and a focus on collective social institutions, as discussed above, needs to contend with the problem posed by the inevitable aggregation of interests. This is not just a problem for the CA but for public policy in general. However, if knowledge creation is conceived as a capability that empowers societies to pursuit their own self-defined goals, as stated above, the ways in which knowledge is created matter instrumentally. For by fostering diverse and inclusive scientific communities, societies ensure the breeding of a wide range of scientific ideas, which in turn expand the range of possibilities for innovation and consequently development. Thus, the evaluation of social arrangements can be made on the basis of how well or badly they promote the production of the broad base of scientific ideas necessary for innovation and development.

The Social Capability for Scientific Knowledge: Implications for RCB

Recognising that scientific knowledge is an irreducibly social good whose realisation depends on the existence of social capabilities requires moving the focus of analysis towards what Deneulin ( 2008 ) defines as structures of living together : a concept originally coined by French philosopher Paul Ricoeur to describe the social institutions within a historical community (people, nation, region): a structure irreducible to interpersonal relations and yet bound up with these (Ricoeur 1992 ). Social institutions, according to these authors, are characterized by ‘a bond of common mores’ (ibid) from which power in common —the capacity to act together—emerges. In other words, social institutions are constituted by individuals bound by common norms, codes and practices in ways that transcend interpersonal relations (Ricoeur refers to the enmeshing of relationships that encompass the plurality of distant others). It is because of this indivisibility that empowerment through collective action is more than the sum of individual efforts. Social structures, therefore, are the locale where empowerment occurs and social goods can be realised, and for this reason they matter beyond their effect upon individuals. From this follows that the production of scientific knowledge by individuals interconnected through common norms and practices is intrinsically bound to the local social structures where those relationships (and the knowledge that emerges from them) are formed. Consequently, an entitlement to the capability to produce scientific knowledge entails a corresponding obligation to assistance to strengthening the necessary processes and institutions, i.e. the connections between actors within the innovation system. This broadens the scope of justice beyond the development of individual capabilities and requires an approach to RCB beyond the individual level.

This article posited scientific knowledge as an irreducibly social good : a good that does not belong to individuals (in the sense that it cannot be reduced to individual acts of learning) and has value beyond its contribution to individual wellbeing (in the sense that it does not benefit individuals directly but society as a whole by expanding its opportunities for innovation). Paraphrasing Ricoeur and Deneulin, scientific knowledge emerges from the structures of knowing together , that is, from the array of social institutions and the interactions between them. The importance of institutions in the creation of scientific knowledge and innovation is not new but can be traced to the influential concept of National Innovation Systems (NIS) (Freeman 1989 ; Lundvall 1992 ), which emphasise the role of institutions in creating and sustaining environments that enable the production and sharing of collective knowledge and resources for the pursuit of social, technological and economic innovation. However, whilst the NIS concept (and its various subsequent derivations) has been useful in highlighting the systemic nature of knowledge production, it is almost exclusively concerned with the commercialisation of innovation, and therefore decisively centred in the firm (Godin 2009 ), with others institutions (government, universities, industry, non-profit, etc.) providing only a supporting role (Watkins et al. 2015 ) and being defined by and devoted to this commercialisation end (Godin 2009 ). Moreover, and paradoxically, the NIS approach does not connect the processes of knowledge creation and diffusion with the political processes of institutional capacity strengthening and governance. The normative approach proposed here bridges this divide; considering knowledge creation processes as a social good on one hand reaffirms the systemic (social) nature of scientific knowledge (a good of society), and on the other makes explicit the relationship between scientific knowledge and its ultimate goal: social transformation (a good for society). This dual social dimension of scientific knowledge, in turn, brings to the fore the moral importance of social and political institutions (governments, universities and research institutions, scientific societies, funders, patient organisations and other civil society groups, industry, etc.) not just as mere facilitators of knowledge creation but as mutually interdependent enablers and constrainers of behaviours, agendas and ultimately performance. This provides a strong rationale for new approaches to RCB that focus on the strengthening of institutional and governance processes alongside traditional technical skills building.

In practice, this means shifting the focus of RCB initiatives from the individual researcher to the social environment that facilitates or hinders knowledge creation processes. If scientific knowledge is a social good that emerges from the social structures of living and knowing together, a broader approach to RCB is needed, one that moves beyond an almost exclusive focus on individuals and to some extent research infrastructure (Beran et al. 2017 ) towards creating enabling institutional, organisational and policy environments for the conduct and translation of research and its embedding into public policy. Strengthening capacity at the level of the individual is not optional; on the contrary, workforce development is the backbone of research systems. However, long-term and sustainable research and innovations systems require a multilevel approach that addresses the multiplicity of disabling factors common to most developing countries: technical know-how and resources for sure, but also insufficient ownership of research agendas (still largely dominated by Western donors), geographic isolation and peripheral engagement with the global scientific community, inadequate engagement with users of research (industry, communities and notably policy makers), and above all lack of political buy-in and supportive public discourses (for example, climate change in the case of renewable energies). It has been argued that in most developing countries it is not the lack of a trained workforce or specific technical competencies but the insufficient coordination between the different components of the innovation system that hinders the process of knowledge creation (Arocena and Sutz 2000 ). Highlighting the normative importance of the structures of knowing together , therefore, sheds light on this often-missing relational dimension of knowledge creation.

Is RCB Neocolonialist ?

In arguing for an entitlement to a process of development that includes scientific knowledge creation, some may see the threat of neocolonialism. Does RCB endorse, if not impose, a Western paradigm of development grounded in some form of technological determinism, i.e. the assumption that scientific and technological development drives social and human development (Cherlet 2014 )? Fully addressing this concern is beyond the more modest aims of this article but below are a few pointers to frame further discussion.

This paper uses an understanding of scientific knowledge (the philosophical worldview, activities, and social institutions that since the Scientific Revolution are identified as modern science) which has historically contributed to a Eurocentric account of progress. Technological progress helped the West portray itself as developed, civilised and rational, in contrast with a rest of the world that was undeveloped, savage and irrational (Harding 1994 ), thus justifying centuries of colonial domination (Seth 2009 ). From this perspective, any attempt to build or strengthen scientific research capacity in LMIC may be seen indeed as a neocolonialist imposition. However, without denying that some approaches to RCB may be questionable for their disregard of local agency and values, neocolonialist labels are unhelpful as they preclude more nuanced analyses of broader power and social justice issues (Horton 2013 ). For example, HIC’s framing of aid (including RCB) in the national interest subordinates development priorities to the needs of HIC. This compromises the ability to bring clear benefits to LMIC because it denies them agency and fails to create the open forms of governance and alliances necessary to respond to development challenges. Dismissing RCB as neocolonialist does little to address these issues and to strike the right balance between benefits accrued to HIC and long-term benefits given to LMIC.

RCB, understood as a process of capability expansion, helps create a new balance of power by redrawing the geographies of science. The history of Western science is a history of culturally biased patterns of systematic knowledge and systematic ignorance (Harding 1994 ), for the questions that came to count as scientific were those whose answers benefitted colonial powers: improvement of land and sea travel, identification of economically valuable indigenous species, or understanding tropical diseases to maintain the colonies healthy and economically viable (Lock and Nguyen 2010 ). Other aspects of nature which did not benefit the expansionist West remained uncharted. Because of the still uneven geographic concentration of scientific capacity, many of these biased patterns of knowledge creation have remained even after decolonisation and global scientific priorities (and funding) continue to be established with the tunnel vision of developed countries’ needs. Empowering LMIC to strengthen scientific knowledge production processes can thus help redress the epistemic biases abovementioned by expanding the range of global research actors and, consequently, definitions, priorities and agendas beyond reductionist understandings of progress based on Western-construed categories.

Neither does RCB impose a Western paradigm at the expense of non-Western approaches and forms of knowledge. This implies an artificial epistemological distinction between Western and non-Western knowledge given (a) the diversity within each construct and (b) the fact that what is defined today as traditional non-Western knowledge has been in contact and extensively influenced by Western knowledge for centuries, and vice-versa (Agrawal 1995 ). Moreover, this article argues for strengthening indigenous S&T capacity, and this presupposes the enmeshing of local knowledge in the scientific enterprise, and a significant degree of control over knowledge-creation processes that precludes any attempt to impose exogenous cultural constructs. Nonetheless, it is important to recognise that indigenisation of scientific knowledge cannot be achieved without a deep engagement with the values and aspirations of the communities such knowledge is intended to benefit (Fejerskov 2017 ). Although this is implicit in the present argument, a more detailed analysis is required in order to devise effective approaches to community engagement, especially in countries deeply stratified along socioeconomic and ethnic lines.

Finally, RCB does not downplay the considerable research that takes place in LMIC (particularly emerging knowledge economies) but emphasises the need to further shift the geographic boundaries of science. The great scientific contributions of the non-Western world are largely forgotten and need re-appropriation. RCB does not ignore the economic and political agency of LMIC, but acknowledges that the pressures of global market forces and the disruptive effects brought forth by rapid technological change can expand or restrict economic, political and social opportunities (Archibugi and Pietrobelli 2003 ). Most LMIC recognise with a sense of urgency that these opportunities cannot be fully exploited by simply consuming S&T (Fu et al. 2011 ; Ghani 2017 ). The approach to RCB advocated in this article, thus, responds to this recognition.

Conclusions

Scientific knowledge remains unequally distributed, but more so is the capacity of societies to produce it. Although strengthening the scientific capacity of developing countries is a priority for development cooperation, these efforts are not underpinned by a properly articulated theory of justice. Rather, they seem to rest upon two implicit assumptions: first, that closing the capacity gap requires fairer access to codified knowledge/information; second, that scientific knowledge is a good to be distributed to individuals alone, thus reducing RCB to strengthening scientists’ technical competencies through education and training without parallel investments to develop and sustain the social structures that facilitate knowledge creation.

This article problematises these assumptions by showing the limitations of a focus on the distribution of existing knowledge, not always relevant to the needs of LMIC and not always utilisable due to lack of adequate structures for the translation of such knowledge into social and economic development. The CA is therefore used here as a justice framework to move beyond issues of access and command over knowledge assets and articulate the idea that what matters for development is the distribution of the capability to produce knowledge, thus highlighting a moral case for assistance to RCB. Though RCB has been a development priority since the 1990s, a clear understanding of what exactly constitutes research capacity is missing. Consequently, RCB interventions have focused on enhancing individuals’ competencies through education and training, also because these are relatively easier to implement and evaluate. Such approaches, however, have not taken sufficient account of the need to strengthen the social, political and economic structures that connect the different components of a nation’s innovation system. This represents a moral blind spot that masks important questions regarding the economic and political arrangements that help or hinder the scientific divide between rich and poor countries.

Using the concept of irreducibly social goods and expanding Sen’s CA approach to include collectives, scientific knowledge is framed as a social good. Consequently, the (social) capability to produce such good requires the strengthening of the social structures for the production of knowledge. This has implications for the interpretation of the human right to science and culture (Article 27 of the UDHR) beyond its current focus on access to scientific knowledge, and for focusing science policy and global research consortia to design holistic approaches to capacity building beyond individual training/skills building.

Scientific capabilities are shaped by country-specific political and institutional contexts, and are thought to reflect countries’ different trajectories of development and patterns of strengths (Bartholomew 1997 ). Seen from this perspective, scientific development is a local phenomenon rooted in the knowledge, skills, etc. accumulated over time and which constitute a nation’s innovation capital, its preferred solution for advancing development. Scientific knowledge as a social good and knowledge creation as a social capability emphasise the importance of construing S&T as spatially and temporally situated, and therefore of paying attention to the unique enmeshing of historic, cultural and social influences that determine the institutional landscape of local research and innovation systems and their functioning. This should warn funding bodies and capacity building experts against the temptation of simply transferring decontextualized blueprints or re-packaging solutions mechanistically—a one-size-fits-all approach. Instead, it calls for more flexible and innovative ways of fostering capacity, beyond simply developing skills so that scientists may fit some pre-defined model, but supporting people, organisations and institutions to challenge current states of affairs and effect change. The idea of social capabilities grounds S&T in its specific social milieu and calls for research leaders and policy makers in LMIC to view capacity development as above all an endogenous and participatory process that requires paying attention to and engaging with society’s specific needs and attitudes (e.g. with regards to emerging technologies). It also challenges them to focus on the bigger picture and shape political agendas from the bottom up. Lastly, it calls for local leaders to challenge the seriously flawed model of capacity building that assumes that external actors know better what their capacity needs are.

The growth of transnational research networks is dissolving national borders, suggesting that S&T is also a global process (Bartholomew 1997 ) consisting of converging standards and complex governance processes. This may throw into question the relevance, or even possibility, of local research and innovation systems grounded in contextual specificity as argued above. This tension between the local and the global may be resolved by acknowledging the need for differentiated scientific capabilities that on one hand respond to local knowledge needs, and on the other enable synergistic relationships for the tackling of common problems. In this regard, local innovation remains relevant not just because it better serves local demands, but also because it diversifies and widens the range of possible solutions to global technological problems. This provides a powerful incentive for international cooperation and justifies global action for assisting LMIC to strengthen their local research systems.

This is the traditional World Bank classification based on Gross National Income (GNI). It has been suggested to be too broad to be distinctive given it groups together countries with different indicators of development, including scientific capacity. Throughout this article, LMIC refers to countries in the low and lower-middle income distributions and excluding upper middle countries (e.g. Argentina, South Africa and Mexico), which are included in the upper-middle distribution as high-income countries (HIC). Whilst recognising that scientific capacity does not necessarily correlate with GNI, the LMIC–HIC classification was chosen for simplicity, and on the basis that overall most countries along the low-middle income distribution tend to underinvest in science and technology, compared to countries in the upper and high-income distributions (Rabesandratana 2015 ), although this is not an absolute rule.

Whilst some commentators prefer to use the term ‘capacity development’ instead of ‘capacity building’ to emphasize that abilities are strengthened and enhanced, rather than built from scratch (Vallejo and When 2016 ), in practice there is little operational difference between the two terms. Therefore, ‘capacity building’ is used here as equivalent to ‘capacity development’.

Abramovitz, M. (1986). Catching up, forging ahead, and falling behind. The Journal of Economic History, 46 (02), 385–406.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ackoff, R. L. (1989). From data to wisdom. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 16 (1), 3–9.

Google Scholar  

Agrawal, A. (1995). Dismantling the divide between indigenous and scientific knowledge. Development and Change, 26 (3), 413–439.

Alkire, S. (2008). Using the capability approach: Prospective and evaluative analyses. In F. Comim, M. Qizilbash, & S. Alkire (Eds.), The capability approach: Concepts, measures and applications (pp. 26–50). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Archibugi, D., & Pietrobelli, C. (2003). The globalisation of technology and its implications for developing countries: Windows of opportunity or further burden? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 70 (9), 861–883.

Arocena, R., & Sutz, J. (2000). Looking at national systems of innovation from the South. Industry and Innovation, 7 (1), 55–75.

Bartholomew, S. (1997). National systems of biotechnology innovation: Complex interdependence in the global system (journal article). Journal of International Business Studies, 28 (2), 241–266. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490100 .

Beran, D., Byass, P., Gbakima, A., Kahn, K., Sankoh, O., Tollman, S., et al. (2017). Research capacity building—Obligations for global health partners. The Lancet Global Health, 5 (6), e567–e568.

Bezuidenhout, L., Leonelly, S., Kelly, A. H., & Rappert, B. (2017). Beyond the digital divide: Towards a situated approach to open data. Science and Public Policy, 44 (4), 464–475.

Chan, L., & Costa, S. (2005). Participation in the global knowledge commons: Challenges and opportunities for research dissemination in developing countries. New library world, 106 (3/4), 141–163.

Chapman, A., & Wyndham, J. (2013). A human right to science. Science, 340 (6138), 1291. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1233319 .

Cheon, H. (2014). In what sense is scientific knowledge collective knowledge? Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 44 (4), 407–423.

Cherlet, J. (2014). Epistemic and technological determinism in development aid. Science, Technology and Human Values, 39 (6), 773–794. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243913516806 .

Cleaver, F. (1999). Paradoxes of participation: Questioning participatory approaches to development. Journal of International Development, 11 (4), 597.

Colglazier, W. (2015). Sustainable development agenda: 2030. Science, 349 (6252), 1048–1050.

Contreras, J. L. (2010). Data sharing, latency variables, and science commons. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 25 (4), 1601–1672.

Davis, J. B. (2015). Agency and the process aspect of capability development: Individual capabilities, collective capabilities, and collective intentions. Filosofia de la Economia, 4, 5–24.

Deneulin, S. (2008). Beyond individual freedom and agency: Structures of living together in Sen’s capability approach to development. In S. Alkire, F. Comim, & M. Qizilbash (Eds.), The capability approach: Concepts, measures and application (pp. 105–124). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dworkin, R. (1981). What is equality? Part 2: Equality of resources. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 10 (4), 283–345.

Eade, D. (1997) Capacity-building: An approach to people-centred development. Great Britain: Oxfam. https://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/capacity-building-an-approach-to-people-centred-development-122906 .

Enoch, J. (2015). Rapid mapping of international funders research capacity strengthening priorities. UK Collaborative on Development Sciences (UKCDS) for the Department for International Development. http://www.ukcds.org.uk/resources/rapid-mapping-of-uk-and-international-funders-priorities-in-research-capacity . Accessed 15 July 2017.

Evans, P. (2002). Collective capabilities, culture, and Amartya Sen’s Development as Freedom. Studies in Comparative International Development, 37 (2), 54–60.

Fejerskov, A. M. (2017). The new technopolitics of development and the global south as a laboratory of technological experimentation. Science, Technology and Human Values, 42 (5), 947–968.

Fernández-Baldor, Á., Hueso, A., & Boni, A. (2012). From individuality to collectivity: The challenges for technology-oriented development projects. In I. Oosterlaken & J. Van den Hoven (Eds.), The capability approach, technology and design (pp. 135–152). Dordrecht: Springer.

Frascati-Manual (2015). Guidelines for collecting and reporting data on research and experimental development. The measurement of scientific, technological and innovation activities (2015). pp. 1–382. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/frascati-manual-2015 .

Freeman, C. (1989). Technology policy and economic performance . Great Britain: Pinter Publishers.

Frické, M. (2009). The knowledge pyramid: A critique of the DIKW hierarchy. Journal of Information Science, 35 (2), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551508094050 .

Fu, X., Pietrobelli, C., & Soete, L. (2011). The role of foreign technology and indigenous innovation in the emerging economies: Technological change and catching-up. World Development, 39 (7), 1204–1212.

Fukuda-Parr, S. (2003). The human development paradigm: Operationalizing sen’s ideas on capabilities. Feminist Economics, 9 (2–3), 301–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/1354570022000077980 .

Furman, J. L., Porter, M. E., & Stern, S. (2002). The determinants of national innovative capacity. Research Policy, 31 (6), 899–933. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00152-4 .

Gertler, M. S. (2003). Tacit knowledge and the economic geography of context, or the undefinable tacitness of being (there). Journal of Economic Geography, 3 (1), 75–99.

Ghani, M. A. (2017). President ghani’s remarks at the first summit of the organization Of Islamic cooperation on science and technology. Office of the President, Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. https://president.gov.af/en/president-ghanis-remarks-at-the-first-summit-of-the-organization-of-islamic-cooperation-on-science-and-technology/ . Accessed 22 Jan 2018.

Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies . London: Sage.

Godin, B. (2009). National innovation system: The system approach in historical perspective. Science, Technology and Human Values, 34 (4), 476–501.

Gore, C. (1997). Irreducibly social goods and the informational basis of Amartya Sen’s capability approach. Journal of International Development, 9 (2), 235–250. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1328(199703)9:2<235::AID-JID436>3.0.CO;2-J .

Harding, S. G. (1994). Is science multicultural? Challenges, resources, opportunities. Uncertainties. Configurations, 2 (2), 301–330. https://doi.org/10.1353/con.1994.0019 .

Horton, R. (2013). Offline: Is global health neocolonialist? The Lancet, 382 (9906), 1690.

Ibrahim, S. (2006). From individual to collective capabilities: The capability approach as a conceptual framework for self-help. Journal of Human Development, 7 (3), 397–416.

Ibrahim, S. (2013). Collective capabilities: What are they and why are they important? E-Bulletin of the Human Development & Capability Association, 22, 4–8.

Johnson, B., Lorenz, E., & Lundvall, B. Å. (2002). Why all this fuss about codified and tacit knowledge? Industrial and Corporate Change, 11 (2), 245–262.

Keri, E., Pearlson, S., & Saunders, C. (2006). Managing and using information systems: A strategic approach . Hoboken: Wiley.

Lock, M., & Nguyen, V.-K. (2010). Colonial disease and biological commensurability. In: Anthropology of biomedicine (pp. 146–175). Wiley-Blackwell.

Lundvall, B.-A. (1992). National innovation system: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning . London: Pinter.

Lundvall, B.-A. (2007). National innovation systems—Analytical concept and development tool. Industry and Innovation, 14 (1), 95–119.

Mazloumian, A., Helbing, D., Lozano, S., Light, R. P., & Börner, K. (2013). Global multi-level analysis of the ‘scientific food Web. Scientific Reports, 3, 1167.

Morgan, P. (2006). The concept of capacity. European Centre for Development Policy Management. http://ecdpm.org/publications/the-concept-of-capacity/ .

Otano-Jiménez, G. (2015). La libertad como relación social: una interpretación sociológica del enfoque de las capacidades de Amartya Sen. Revista iberoamericana de estudios de desarrollo  =  Iberoamerican . Journal of Development Studies, 4 (1), 98–127.

Papaioannou, T. (2011). Technological innovation, global justice and politics of development. Progress in Development Studies, 11 (4), 321–338.

Papaioannou, T. (2014). Innovation and development in search of a political theory of justice. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 637 (3), 179–202.

Parker, M., & Kingori, P. (2016). Good and bad research collaborations: Researchers’ views on science and ethics in global health research. PLoS ONE, 11 (10), e0163579.

Plomer, A. (2013). The human rights paradox: Intellectual property rights and rights of access to science. Human Rights Quarterly, 35 (1), 143–175.

Pogge, T. (2011). The Health Impact Fund: How to make new medicines accessible to all. In S. Benatar & G. Brock (Eds.), Global health and global health ethics (pp. 241–250). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Polanyi, M. (1966). The logic of tacit inference. Philosophy, 41 (155), 1–18.

Powell, W. W., & Snellman, K. (2004). The knowledge economy. Annual Review Sociology, 30, 199–220.

Rabesandratana, T. (2015). Developing nations urged to spend big on science. SciDev.Net. http://www.scidev.net/global/technology/news/developing-nations-urged-spend-on-science-UN.html . Accessed 15 July 2017.

Rappert, B., & Bezuidenhout, L. (2016). Data sharing in low-resourced research environments. Prometheus, 34 (3–4), 207–224.

Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Ricoeur, P. (1992). Oneself as another . London: University of Chicago Press.

Robbins, L. (1933). An essay on the nature and significance of economic science . London: Allen and Unwin.

Robeyns, I. (2005). The capability approach: A theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development, 6 (1), 93–117.

Romer, P. M. (1986). Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94 (5), 1002–1037.

Rowley, J. (2007). The wisdom hierarchy: Representations of the DIKW hierarchy. Journal of information science, 33 (2), 163–180.

Sen, A. (2001). Development as freedom . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Seth, S. (2009). Putting knowledge in its place: Science, colonialism, and the postcolonial. Postcolonial Studies, 12 (4), 373–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/13688790903350633 .

Shaheed, F. (2012). Report of the special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights. United Nations Human Rights Council. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session20/A-HRC-20-26_en.pdf . Accessed 23 Dec 2017.

Shaver, L. (2010). The right to science and culture. Wisconsin Law Review, 1, 121–184.

Stewart, F. (2005). Groups and capabilities. Journal of Human Development, 6 (2), 185–204.

Stiglitz, J. E. (1999). Knowledge as a global public good. In I. Kaul, I. Grunberg, & M. A. Stern (Eds.), Global public goods: International cooperation in the 21st century (pp. 308–326). New York: Oxford University Press.

Taylor, C. (1995). Irreducibly social goods. Philosophical arguments (pp. 127–145). Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

Timmermann, C. (2014). Sharing in or benefiting from scientific advancement? Science and Engineering Ethics, 20 (1), 111–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-013-9438-3 .

Timmermann, C. (2017). Contributive justice: An exploration of a wider provision of meaningful work. Social Justice Research , 1–27.

Ulrich, D., & Smallwood, N. (2004). Capitalizing on capabilities. Harvard Business Review, 82 (6), 119–128.

UN (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. United Nations https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld/publication . Accessed 19 Apr 2016.

Vallejo, B., & Wehn, U. (2016). Capacity development evaluation: The challenge of the results agenda and measuring return on investment in the global south. World Development, 79 (Supplement C), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.10.044 .

Velho, L. (2004). Research capacity building for development: From old to new assumptions. Science Technology & Society, 9 (2), 171–207.

Watkins, A., Papaioannou, T., Mugwagwa, J., & Kale, D. (2015). National innovation systems and the intermediary role of industry associations in building institutional capacities for innovation in developing countries: A critical review of the literature. Research Policy, 44 (8), 1407–1418.

Zins, C. (2007). Conceptual approaches for defining data, information, and knowledge. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 58, 479–493. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20508 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Dr. Sridhar Venkatampuram for helpful discussions on earlier versions of this manuscript and the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments which helped me improve the clarity and quality of the argument. A special thanks to the eagle-eyed editor who proofread the final version and provided further interesting insights.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Winchester, Winchester, UK

Maru Mormina

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maru Mormina .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Mormina, M. Science, Technology and Innovation as Social Goods for Development: Rethinking Research Capacity Building from Sen’s Capabilities Approach. Sci Eng Ethics 25 , 671–692 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0037-1

Download citation

Received : 26 October 2017

Accepted : 20 February 2018

Published : 01 March 2018

Issue Date : 15 June 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0037-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Development
• Capacity building
• Science technology and innovation
• Research systems
• North–South partnerships
• Capabilities approach
• Collective or social capabilities
• Low and middle income countries
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Talk to our experts

1800-120-456-456

• Technology Essay

Essay on Technology

The word "technology" and its uses have immensely changed since the 20th century, and with time, it has continued to evolve ever since. We are living in a world driven by technology. The advancement of technology has played an important role in the development of human civilization, along with cultural changes. Technology provides innovative ways of doing work through various smart and innovative means. 

Electronic appliances, gadgets, faster modes of communication, and transport have added to the comfort factor in our lives. It has helped in improving the productivity of individuals and different business enterprises. Technology has brought a revolution in many operational fields. It has undoubtedly made a very important contribution to the progress that mankind has made over the years.

The Advancement of Technology:

Technology has reduced the effort and time and increased the efficiency of the production requirements in every field. It has made our lives easy, comfortable, healthy, and enjoyable. It has brought a revolution in transport and communication. The advancement of technology, along with science, has helped us to become self-reliant in all spheres of life. With the innovation of a particular technology, it becomes part of society and integral to human lives after a point in time.

Technology is Our Part of Life:

Technology has changed our day-to-day lives. Technology has brought the world closer and better connected. Those days have passed when only the rich could afford such luxuries. Because of the rise of globalisation and liberalisation, all luxuries are now within the reach of the average person. Today, an average middle-class family can afford a mobile phone, a television, a washing machine, a refrigerator, a computer, the Internet, etc. At the touch of a switch, a man can witness any event that is happening in far-off places.  

Benefits of Technology in All Fields: 

We cannot escape technology; it has improved the quality of life and brought about revolutions in various fields of modern-day society, be it communication, transportation, education, healthcare, and many more. Let us learn about it.

Technology in Communication:

With the advent of technology in communication, which includes telephones, fax machines, cellular phones, the Internet, multimedia, and email, communication has become much faster and easier. It has transformed and influenced relationships in many ways. We no longer need to rely on sending physical letters and waiting for several days for a response. Technology has made communication so simple that you can connect with anyone from anywhere by calling them via mobile phone or messaging them using different messaging apps that are easy to download.

Innovation in communication technology has had an immense influence on social life. Human socialising has become easier by using social networking sites, dating, and even matrimonial services available on mobile applications and websites.

Today, the Internet is used for shopping, paying utility bills, credit card bills, admission fees, e-commerce, and online banking. In the world of marketing, many companies are marketing and selling their products and creating brands over the internet. 

In the field of travel, cities, towns, states, and countries are using the web to post detailed tourist and event information. Travellers across the globe can easily find information on tourism, sightseeing, places to stay, weather, maps, timings for events, transportation schedules, and buy tickets to various tourist spots and destinations.

Technology in the Office or Workplace:

Technology has increased efficiency and flexibility in the workspace. Technology has made it easy to work remotely, which has increased the productivity of the employees. External and internal communication has become faster through emails and apps. Automation has saved time, and there is also a reduction in redundancy in tasks. Robots are now being used to manufacture products that consistently deliver the same product without defect until the robot itself fails. Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning technology are innovations that are being deployed across industries to reap benefits.

Technology has wiped out the manual way of storing files. Now files are stored in the cloud, which can be accessed at any time and from anywhere. With technology, companies can make quick decisions, act faster towards solutions, and remain adaptable. Technology has optimised the usage of resources and connected businesses worldwide. For example, if the customer is based in America, he can have the services delivered from India. They can communicate with each other in an instant. Every company uses business technology like virtual meeting tools, corporate social networks, tablets, and smart customer relationship management applications that accelerate the fast movement of data and information.

Technology in Education:

Technology is making the education industry improve over time. With technology, students and parents have a variety of learning tools at their fingertips. Teachers can coordinate with classrooms across the world and share their ideas and resources online. Students can get immediate access to an abundance of good information on the Internet. Teachers and students can access plenty of resources available on the web and utilise them for their project work, research, etc. Online learning has changed our perception of education. 

The COVID-19 pandemic brought a paradigm shift using technology where school-going kids continued their studies from home and schools facilitated imparting education by their teachers online from home. Students have learned and used 21st-century skills and tools, like virtual classrooms, AR (Augmented Reality), robots, etc. All these have increased communication and collaboration significantly. 

Technology in Banking:

Technology and banking are now inseparable. Technology has boosted digital transformation in how the banking industry works and has vastly improved banking services for their customers across the globe.

Technology has made banking operations very sophisticated and has reduced errors to almost nil, which were somewhat prevalent with manual human activities. Banks are adopting Artificial Intelligence (AI) to increase their efficiency and profits. With the emergence of Internet banking, self-service tools have replaced the traditional methods of banking. 

You can now access your money, handle transactions like paying bills, money transfers, and online purchases from merchants, and monitor your bank statements anytime and from anywhere in the world. Technology has made banking more secure and safe. You do not need to carry cash in your pocket or wallet; the payments can be made digitally using e-wallets. Mobile banking, banking apps, and cybersecurity are changing the face of the banking industry.

Manufacturing and Production Industry Automation:

At present, manufacturing industries are using all the latest technologies, ranging from big data analytics to artificial intelligence. Big data, ARVR (Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality), and IoT (Internet of Things) are the biggest manufacturing industry players. Automation has increased the level of productivity in various fields. It has reduced labour costs, increased efficiency, and reduced the cost of production.

For example, 3D printing is used to design and develop prototypes in the automobile industry. Repetitive work is being done easily with the help of robots without any waste of time. This has also reduced the cost of the products. 

Technology in the Healthcare Industry:

Technological advancements in the healthcare industry have not only improved our personal quality of life and longevity; they have also improved the lives of many medical professionals and students who are training to become medical experts. It has allowed much faster access to the medical records of each patient. 

The Internet has drastically transformed patients' and doctors’ relationships. Everyone can stay up to date on the latest medical discoveries, share treatment information, and offer one another support when dealing with medical issues. Modern technology has allowed us to contact doctors from the comfort of our homes. There are many sites and apps through which we can contact doctors and get medical help. 

Breakthrough innovations in surgery, artificial organs, brain implants, and networked sensors are examples of transformative developments in the healthcare industry. Hospitals use different tools and applications to perform their administrative tasks, using digital marketing to promote their services.

Technology in Agriculture:

Today, farmers work very differently than they would have decades ago. Data analytics and robotics have built a productive food system. Digital innovations are being used for plant breeding and harvesting equipment. Software and mobile devices are helping farmers harvest better. With various data and information available to farmers, they can make better-informed decisions, for example, tracking the amount of carbon stored in soil and helping with climate change.

Disadvantages of Technology:

People have become dependent on various gadgets and machines, resulting in a lack of physical activity and tempting people to lead an increasingly sedentary lifestyle. Even though technology has increased the productivity of individuals, organisations, and the nation, it has not increased the efficiency of machines. Machines cannot plan and think beyond the instructions that are fed into their system. Technology alone is not enough for progress and prosperity. Management is required, and management is a human act. Technology is largely dependent on human intervention. 

Computers and smartphones have led to an increase in social isolation. Young children are spending more time surfing the internet, playing games, and ignoring their real lives. Usage of technology is also resulting in job losses and distracting students from learning. Technology has been a reason for the production of weapons of destruction.

Dependency on technology is also increasing privacy concerns and cyber crimes, giving way to hackers.

FAQs on Technology Essay

1. What is technology?

Technology refers to innovative ways of doing work through various smart means. The advancement of technology has played an important role in the development of human civilization. It has helped in improving the productivity of individuals and businesses.

2. How has technology changed the face of banking?

Technology has made banking operations very sophisticated. With the emergence of Internet banking, self-service tools have replaced the traditional methods of banking. You can now access your money, handle transactions, and monitor your bank statements anytime and from anywhere in the world. Technology has made banking more secure and safe.

3. How has technology brought a revolution in the medical field?

Patients and doctors keep each other up to date on the most recent medical discoveries, share treatment information, and offer each other support when dealing with medical issues. It has allowed much faster access to the medical records of each patient. Modern technology has allowed us to contact doctors from the comfort of our homes. There are many websites and mobile apps through which we can contact doctors and get medical help.

4. Are we dependent on technology?

Yes, today, we are becoming increasingly dependent on technology. Computers, smartphones, and modern technology have helped humanity achieve success and progress. However, in hindsight, people need to continuously build a healthy lifestyle, sorting out personal problems that arise due to technological advancements in different aspects of human life.

How has technology changed - and changed us - in the past 20 years?

Remember this? Image:  REUTERS/Stephen Hird

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Madeleine Hillyer

.chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} Explore and monitor how .chakra .wef-15eoq1r{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;color:#F7DB5E;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-15eoq1r{font-size:1.125rem;}} Digital Communications is affecting economies, industries and global issues

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:, technological transformation.

• Since the dotcom bubble burst back in 2000, technology has radically transformed our societies and our daily lives.
• From smartphones to social media and healthcare, here's a brief history of the 21st century's technological revolution.

Just over 20 years ago, the dotcom bubble burst , causing the stocks of many tech firms to tumble. Some companies, like Amazon, quickly recovered their value – but many others were left in ruins. In the two decades since this crash, technology has advanced in many ways.

Many more people are online today than they were at the start of the millennium. Looking at broadband access, in 2000, just half of Americans had broadband access at home. Today, that number sits at more than 90% .

This broadband expansion was certainly not just an American phenomenon. Similar growth can be seen on a global scale; while less than 7% of the world was online in 2000, today over half the global population has access to the internet.

Similar trends can be seen in cellphone use. At the start of the 2000s, there were 740 million cell phone subscriptions worldwide. Two decades later, that number has surpassed 8 billion, meaning there are now more cellphones in the world than people

Have you read?

The future of jobs report 2023, how to follow the growth summit 2023.

At the same time, technology was also becoming more personal and portable. Apple sold its first iPod in 2001, and six years later it introduced the iPhone, which ushered in a new era of personal technology. These changes led to a world in which technology touches nearly everything we do.

Technology has changed major sectors over the past 20 years, including media, climate action and healthcare. The World Economic Forum’s Technology Pioneers , which just celebrated its 20th anniversary, gives us insight how emerging tech leaders have influenced and responded to these changes.

Media and media consumption

The past 20 years have greatly shaped how and where we consume media. In the early 2000s, many tech firms were still focused on expanding communication for work through advanced bandwidth for video streaming and other media consumption that is common today.

Others followed the path of expanding media options beyond traditional outlets. Early Tech Pioneers such as PlanetOut did this by providing an outlet and alternative media source for LGBTQIA communities as more people got online.

Following on from these first new media options, new communities and alternative media came the massive growth of social media. In 2004 , fewer than 1 million people were on Myspace; Facebook had not even launched. By 2018, Facebook had more 2.26 billion users with other sites also growing to hundreds of millions of users.

While these new online communities and communication channels have offered great spaces for alternative voices, their increased use has also brought issues of increased disinformation and polarization.

Today, many tech start-ups are focused on preserving these online media spaces while also mitigating the disinformation which can come with them. Recently, some Tech Pioneers have also approached this issue, including TruePic – which focuses on photo identification – and Two Hat , which is developing AI-powered content moderation for social media.

Climate change and green tech

Many scientists today are looking to technology to lead us towards a carbon-neutral world. Though renewed attention is being given to climate change today, these efforts to find a solution through technology is not new. In 2001, green tech offered a new investment opportunity for tech investors after the crash, leading to a boom of investing in renewable energy start-ups including Bloom Energy , a Technology Pioneer in 2010.

In the past two decades, tech start-ups have only expanded their climate focus. Many today are focuses on initiatives far beyond clean energy to slow the impact of climate change.

Different start-ups, including Carbon Engineering and Climeworks from this year’s Technology Pioneers, have started to roll out carbon capture technology. These technologies remove CO2 from the air directly, enabling scientists to alleviate some of the damage from fossil fuels which have already been burned.

Another expanding area for young tech firms today is food systems innovation. Many firms, like Aleph Farms and Air Protein, are creating innovative meat and dairy alternatives that are much greener than their traditional counterparts.

Biotech and healthcare

The early 2000s also saw the culmination of a biotech boom that had started in the mid-1990s. Many firms focused on advancing biotechnologies through enhanced tech research.

An early Technology Pioneer, Actelion Pharmaceuticals was one of these companies. Actelion’s tech researched the single layer of cells separating every blood vessel from the blood stream. Like many other biotech firms at the time, their focus was on precise disease and treatment research.

While many tech firms today still focus on disease and treatment research, many others have been focusing on healthcare delivery. Telehealth has been on the rise in recent years , with many young tech expanding virtual healthcare options. New technologies such as virtual visits, chatbots are being used to delivery healthcare to individuals, especially during Covid-19.

Many companies are also focusing their healthcare tech on patients, rather than doctors. For example Ada, a symptom checker app, used to be designed for doctor’s use but has now shifted its language and interface to prioritize giving patients information on their symptoms. Other companies, like 7 cups, are focused are offering mental healthcare support directly to their users without through their app instead of going through existing offices.

The past two decades have seen healthcare tech get much more personal and use tech for care delivery, not just advancing medical research.

The World Economic Forum was the first to draw the world’s attention to the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the current period of unprecedented change driven by rapid technological advances. Policies, norms and regulations have not been able to keep up with the pace of innovation, creating a growing need to fill this gap.

The Forum established the Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution Network in 2017 to ensure that new and emerging technologies will help—not harm—humanity in the future. Headquartered in San Francisco, the network launched centres in China, India and Japan in 2018 and is rapidly establishing locally-run Affiliate Centres in many countries around the world.

The global network is working closely with partners from government, business, academia and civil society to co-design and pilot agile frameworks for governing new and emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI) , autonomous vehicles , blockchain , data policy , digital trade , drones , internet of things (IoT) , precision medicine and environmental innovations .

Learn more about the groundbreaking work that the Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution Network is doing to prepare us for the future.

Want to help us shape the Fourth Industrial Revolution? Contact us to find out how you can become a member or partner.

In the early 2000s, many companies were at the start of their recovery from the bursting dotcom bubble. Since then, we’ve seen a large expansion in the way tech innovators approach areas such as new media, climate change, healthcare delivery and more.

At the same time, we have also seen tech companies rise to the occasion of trying to combat issues which arose from the first group such as internet content moderation, expanding climate change solutions.

The Technology Pioneers' 2020 cohort marks the 20th anniversary of this community - and looking at the latest awardees can give us a snapshot of where the next two decades of tech may be heading.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

The Agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} Weekly

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Forum Institutional .chakra .wef-17xejub{-webkit-flex:1;-ms-flex:1;flex:1;justify-self:stretch;-webkit-align-self:stretch;-ms-flex-item-align:stretch;align-self:stretch;} .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

What to expect at the Special Meeting on Global Cooperation, Growth and Energy for Development

Spencer Feingold and Gayle Markovitz

April 19, 2024

From 'Quit-Tok' to proximity bias, here are 11 buzzwords from the world of hybrid work

Kate Whiting

April 17, 2024

Davos 2024 Opening Film

Building trust amid uncertainty – 3 risk experts on the state of the world in 2024

Andrea Willige

March 27, 2024

Why obesity is rising and how we can live healthy lives

Shyam Bishen

March 20, 2024

Global cooperation is stalling – but new trade pacts show collaboration is still possible. Here are 6 to know about

Simon Torkington

March 15, 2024

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

The effects of technological developments on work and their implications for continuous vocational education and training: a systematic review.

• Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany

Technology is changing the way organizations and their employees need to accomplish their work. Empirical evidence on this topic is scarce. The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the effects of technological developments on work characteristics and to derive the implications for work demands and continuous vocational education and training (CVET). The following research questions are answered: What are the effects of new technologies on work characteristics? What are the implications thereof for continuous vocational education and training? Technologies, defined as digital, electrical or mechanical tools that affect the accomplishment of work tasks, are considered in various disciplines, such as sociology or psychology. A theoretical framework based on theories from these disciplines (e.g., upskilling, task-based approach) was developed and statements on the relationships between technology and work characteristics, such as complexity, autonomy, or meaningfulness, were derived. A systematic literature review was conducted by searching databases from the fields of psychology, sociology, economics and educational science. Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Empirical evidence was extracted and its implications for work demands and CVET were derived by using a model that illustrates the components of learning environments. Evidence indicates an increase in complexity and mental work, especially while working with automated systems and robots. Manual work is reported to decrease on many occasions. Workload and workflow interruptions increase simultaneously with autonomy, especially with regard to digital communication devices. Role expectations and opportunities for development depend on how the profession and the technology relate to each other, especially when working with automated systems. The implications for the work demands necessary to deal with changes in work characteristics include knowledge about technology, openness toward change and technology, skills for self- and time management and for further professional and career development. Implications for the design of formal learning environments (i.e., the content, method, assessment, and guidance) include that the work demands mentioned must be part of the content of the trainings, the teachers/trainers must be equipped to promote those work demands, and that instruction models used for the learning environments must be flexible in their application.

Introduction

In the face of technology-driven disruptive changes in societal and organizational practices, continuous vocational education and training (CVET) lacks information on how the impact of technologies on work must be considered from an educational perspective ( Cascio and Montealegre, 2016 ). Research on workplace technologies, i.e., tools or systems that have the potential to replace or supplement work tasks, typically are concerned with one out of two areas of interest: First, economic and sociological research repeatedly raises the question on technological mass-unemployment and societal inequality as a result of technological advances ( Brynjolfsson and McAfee, 2014 ; Ford, 2015 ; Frey and Osborne, 2017 ). And second, management literature questions the suitability of prevailing organizational structures in the face of the so-called “fourth industrial revolution” ( Schwab, 2017 ), taking visionary leaps into a fully automated future of digital value creation ( Roblek et al., 2016 ).

Many of the contributions of scholars discuss the enormous potential of new technologies for work and society at a hypothetical level, which led to a large number of position papers. Moreover, the question on what consequences recent developments, such as working with robots, automated systems or artificial intelligence will have for different professions remain largely unclear. By examining what workplace technologies actually “do” in the work environment, it was suggested that work tasks change because of technological developments ( Autor et al., 2003 ; Autor, 2015 ). This is due to technologies substituting different operations or entire tasks and thus leave room for other activities. Jobs are defined by the work tasks and the conditions under which the tasks have to be performed. This in turn defines the necessary competences, that is the potential capacity to carry out a job (e.g., Ellström, 1997 ). Therefore, CVET needs to be informed on the changes that technology causes in work tasks and the consequential characteristics of work. Only then CVET is able to derive the required competences of employees and organize learning environments that foster the acquirement of these competences. These insights can be used to determine the implications thereof for the components of formal learning environments: content, didactics, trainer behavior, assessment, and resources (e.g., Mulder et al., 2015 ).

The aim of this systematic literature review is to get insight into the effects of new technological developments on work characteristics in order to derive the necessary work demands and their implications for the design of formal learning environments in CVET.

Therefore, the following research questions will be answered:

RQ 1 : What are the effects of new technologies on work characteristics?

RQ 2 : What are the implications thereof for continuous vocational education and training?

Theoretical considerations on the relationships between technology and work characteristics are presented before the methods for searching, selecting and analyzing suitable studies are described. Regarding the results section, the structure is based on the three main steps of analyzing the included studies: First, the variables identified within the selected studies are clustered and defined in terms of work characteristics. Second, a comprehensive overview of evidence on the relationships between technologies and work characteristics is displayed. Third, the evidence is evaluated regarding the work demands that result from technologies changing work characteristics. Finally, the implications for CVET and future research as well as the limitations of this study will be discussed.

Theoretical Framework

In this section, a conceptualization of technology and theoretical assumptions on relationships between technology and work characteristics will be outlined. Research within various disciplines, such as sociology, management, economics, educational science, and psychology was considered to inform us on the role of technology within work. Completing this section, an overview of the various components of learning environments is provided to be used as a basis for the analyses of the empirical evidence.

Outlining Technology and Recent Technological Developments

A clear definition of technology often lacks in studies, what may be due to the fact that the word itself is an “equivoque” ( Weick, 1990 , p. 1) and a “repository of overlapping inconsistent meanings” ( McOmber, 1999 , p. 149). A suitable definition can be provided by analyzing what technologies actually “do” ( Autor et al., 2003 , p. 1,280). The primary goal of technology at work is to save or enhance labor in the form of work tasks, defined as “a unit of work activity that produces output” ( Autor, 2013 , p. 186). Technology can therefore be defined as mechanical or digital devices, tools or systems. These are used to replace work tasks or complement the execution of work tasks (e.g., McOmber, 1999 ; Autor et al., 2003 ). According to this view, technology is conceptualized according to “its status as a tool” (“instrumentality”; McOmber, 1999 , p. 141). Alternatively, technology is understood as “the product of a specific historical time and place,” reflecting a stage of development within a predefined historical process (“industrialization”; McOmber, 1999 , p. 143) or as the “newest or latest instrumental products of human imagination” (“novelty”; McOmber, 1999 , p. 143), reflecting its nature that is rapidly replacing and “outdating” its predecessors. The definition according to “instrumentality” is particularly suitable for this research, as the interest focuses on individual-level effects of technologies and its use for accomplishing work. Therefore, the technology needs to be mentioned explicitly (e.g., “robot” instead of “digital transformation”) and described specifically in the form with which the employee is confronted at the workplace. Different definitions may reflect different perspectives on the role of technology for society and work. These perspectives in the form of paradigmatic views ( Liker et al., 1999 ) include philosophical and cultural beliefs as well as ideas on organizational design and labor relations. They differ with regard to the complexity in which the social context is believed to determine the impact of technology on society. Listed in accordance to increasing social complexity, the impact may be determined by technology itself (i.e., “technological determinism”), established power relations (i.e., “political interest”), managerial decisions (i.e., “management of technology”), or the interaction between technology and its social context (i.e., “interpretivist”) ( Liker et al., 1999 ). Later research added an even more complex perspective, according to which the effects of technology on society and organizations are determined by the relations between the actors themselves (i.e., “sociomateriality”; Orlikowski and Scott, 2008 ). Paradigmatic views may guide research in terms of content, purpose and goals, which in turn is likely to affect the methods and approach to research and may be specific to disciplines. For instance, Marxist sociological research following the view of “political interest” or research in information systems following the view of “management of technology.”

New technological developments are widely discussed in various disciplines. For instance, Ghobakhloo (2018) summarizes the expected areas of application of various technological concepts within the “smart factory” in the manufacturing industry: The internet of things as an umbrella term for independent communication of physical objects, big data as procedure to analyse enormous amounts of data to predict the consequences of operative, administrative, and strategic actions, blockchain as the basis for independent, transparent, secure, and trustworthy transaction executed by humans or machines, and cloud computing as an internet-based flexible infrastructure to manage all these processes simultaneously ( Cascio and Montealegre, 2016 ; Ghobakhloo, 2018 ). The central question to guide the next section is to what extent these new technologies, and also well-established technologies such as information and communication technologies (ICT), which are constantly being expanded with new functions, could influence work characteristics on a theoretical basis.

Theories on the Relationships Between Technology and Work Characteristics

A central discussion on technology can be found in the sociological literature on deskilling vs. upgrading ( Heisig, 2009 ). The definition of “skill” in empirical studies on this subject varies regarding its content by describing either the level of complexity that an employee is faced with at work, or the level of autonomy that employees are able to make use of Spenner (1990) . Theories advocating the deskilling of work (e.g., labor process theory; Braverman, 1998 ) propose that technology is used to undermine workers' skill, sense of control, and freedom. Employees need to support a mechanized workflow under constant surveillance in order to maximize production efficiency ( Braverman, 1998 ). Other authors, advocating “upskilling” ( Blauner, 1967 ; Bell, 1976 ; Zuboff, 1988 ), propose the opposite by claiming that technology frees employee's from strenuous tasks, leaving them with more challenging and fulfilling tasks ( Francis, 1986 ). In addition, issues of identity at work were raised by Blauner (1967) who acknowledged that employees may feel “alienated” as soon as technologies change or substitute work that is meaningful to them, leaving them with a feeling of powerlessness, meaninglessness, or self-estrangement ( Shepard, 1977 ). In sum, sociological theories suggest that technology has an impact on the level of freedom, power and privacy of employees, determining their identity at work and the level of alienation they experience.

According to contingency theories ( Burns and Stalker, 1994 ; Liker et al., 1999 ) technology is a means to reduce uncertainty and increase competitiveness for organizations ( Parker et al., 2017 ). Therefore, the effects of technology on the employee depend on strategic decisions that fit the organizational environment best. When operational uncertainty is high, organizations get more competitive by using technology to enhance the flexibility of employees in order to enable a self-organized adaption to the changing environment ( Cherns, 1976 ). This increases employee's flexibility by allowing them to identify and decide on new ways to add value to the organization (“organic organization”; Burns and Stalker, 1994 ). When operational uncertainty is low, organizations formalize and standardize procedures in order to optimize the workflow and make outputs more calculable (“mechanistic organization”; Burns and Stalker, 1994 ). This leads to less opportunities for individual decision-making and less flexibility for the employees. In sum, contingency theories suggest, that the effects of technology depend on the uncertainty and competitiveness in the external environment and may increase or decrease employee's flexibility and opportunities for decision-making and self-organization.

Economic research following the task-based approach from Autor et al. (2003) suggests, that technology substitutes routine tasks and complements complex (or “non-routine”) ones. Routine manual and cognitive tasks usually follow a defined set of explicit rules, which makes them susceptible to automation. By analyzing qualification requirements in relation to employment rates and wage development, it was argued that workplace automation substitutes routine and low-skill tasks and thus favors individuals who can carry out high-skilled complex work due to their education and cognitive abilities ( Card and DiNardo, 2002 ; Autor et al., 2003 ). This means, that the accomplishment of tasks “demanding flexibility, creativity, generalized problem-solving, and complex communications” ( Autor et al., 2003 , p. 1,284) becomes more important. Complex tasks, so far, posed a challenge for automation, because they required procedural and often implicit knowledge ( Polanyi, 1966 ; Autor, 2015 ). However, recent technological developments such as machine learning, are capable of delivering heuristic responses to complex cognitive tasks by applying inductive thinking or big data analysis ( Autor, 2015 ). Regarding complex manual tasks, mobile robots are increasingly equipped with advanced sensors which enable them to navigate through dynamic environments and interactively collaborate with human employees ( Cascio and Montealegre, 2016 ). In sum, economic research following the task-based approach argues that technology affects the routineness and complexity of work by substituting routine tasks. However, new technologies may be able to increasingly substitute and complement not only routine tasks, but complex tasks as well. According to the theories, this will again increase the complexity of work by creating new demands for problem-solving and reviewing the technology's activity.

Useful insights can be gained from psychological theories that explicitly take the role of work characteristics into account. Work characteristics are often mentioned by for instance sociological theories (e.g., autonomy and meaningfulness) without clearly defining the concepts. Particularly the job characteristics model of Hackman and Oldham (1975) and the job-demand-control model of Karasek (1979) and Karasek et al. (1998) are consulted to further clarify the meaning of autonomy and meaningfulness at work. With regard to autonomy, Hackman and Oldham's model 1975 conceptualizes autonomy as a work characteristic, defined as “the degree to which the job provides substantial freedom, independence, and discretion to the employee in scheduling the work and in determining the procedures to be used in carrying it out” ( Hackman and Oldham, 1975 , p. 162). According to the authors, autonomy facilitates various work outcomes, such as motivation and performance. In a similar vein, Karasek et al. (1998) stress the role of autonomy in the form of “decision authority” that interacts with more demanding work characteristics, such as workload or frequent interruptions and therefore enables a prediction of job strain and stress ( Karasek et al., 1998 ). With regard to meaningfulness, Hackman and Oldham (1975) clarify that different core job dimensions, such as the significance of one's own work results for the work and lives of other people, the direct contribution to a common goal with visible outcomes, and the employment of various skills, talents and activities all enhance the perception of meaningfulness at work. In sum, psychological theories on employee motivation and stress clarify the concepts of autonomy and meaningfulness by illustrating the factors that contribute to their experience in relation to challenging and rewarding aspects of work.

Components of CVET

In order to formulate the implications for CVET of the studied effects of technology on work characteristics, a framework with the different components of CVET is needed. The objective of the VET system and continuous education is to qualify people by supporting the acquirement of required competences, for instance by providing training. Competences refer to the potential capacity of an individual in order to successfully carry out work tasks ( Ellström, 1997 ). They contain various components such as work-related knowledge and social skills (e.g., Sonntag, 1992 ). Competences are considered here as “the combination of knowledge, skills and attitude, in relation to one another and in relation to (future) jobs” ( Mulder and Baumann, 2005 , p. 106; e.g., Baartman and de Bruijn, 2011 ).

Participants in CVET enter the system with competences, such as prior knowledge, motivation, and expectations. It is argued that these have to be considered when designing learning environments for CVET. Next to making the distinction between the different components of learning environments content, guidance, method, and assessment, it is considered important that these components are coherent and consistent ( Mulder et al., 2015 ). For instance, the content of the training needs to fit to the objectives and the background of the participants. The same goes for the method or didactics used (e.g., co-operative learning, frontal instruction) and the guidance of teachers, mentors or trainers. In addition, assessment needs to be consistent with all these components. For instance, problem based learning or competence based training requires other forms of assessment than more classical teacher centered forms of didactics, which makes a classic multiple choice test not fitting ( Gulikers et al., 2004 ). Figure 1 contains an overview of the components of learning environments for CVET.

Figure 1 . Components of CVET learning environments (adapted from Mulder et al., 2015 , p. 501).

Three steps are necessary to answer the research questions. Firstly, a systematic search and review of empirical studies reporting evidence on the direct relationships between new technologies and work characteristics. Secondly, an analysis of the evidence with regard to its implications for work demands. Thirdly, deriving the work demands and their implications for CVET.

Systematic Search Strategy

Due to the interdisciplinary nature of our research, specific databases were selected for each of the disciplines involved: Business Source Premier (business and management research) and PsycArticles (psychology) were searched via EBSCOhost, and ERIC (educational science), and Sociological Abstracts (sociology) were searched via ProQuest.

Identifying suitable keywords for technological concepts is challenging due to the rapidly changing and inconsistent terminology and the nested nature of technological concepts ( Huang et al., 2015 ). Therefore, technological terms were systematically mapped by using the different thesauri provided by each of the chosen databases. After exploding a basic term within a thesaurus, the resulting narrower terms and related terms were documented and examined within the following procedure: (a) Checking the compatibility with our definition of technology reflecting its instrumentality, (b) Adjustment of keywords that are too broad or too narrow, (c) Disassembling nested concepts. The procedure was repeated stepwise for each of the databases. Finally, 45 terms that reflect new technologies were documented and used for the database search.

Keywords reflecting work characteristics are derived from the theoretical conceptualizations previously outlined. Synonyms for different concepts within the relevant theories were identified and included. In order to narrow our search results, additionally operators for empirical studies conducted in a workplace setting were added.

In order to avoid unnecessary redundancy, the use of asterisks was carefully considered, provided that the search results did not lose significantly in precision or the number of hits did not grow to an unmanageable number of studies. The final search string is shown in Table 1 .

Table 1 . Final search string.

Eligibility Criteria and Study Selection

Technical criteria included methodological adequacy. This was ensured by only including studies published in peer-reviewed journals. In addition, the studies had to provide quantitative or qualitative data on relationships between technology and work characteristics. Only English-language studies were considered, because most of the studies are published in English and therefore the most complete overview of the existing knowledge on this topic can be obtained. This also enables as many readers as possible to have access to the original studies and analyse the findings of the empirical studies themselves.

Concerning technology, variables had to express the direct consequence or interaction with a certain technology (e.g., the amount of computer-use or experience with robots in the workplace) and indirect psychological states that conceptually resulted from the presence of the technology (e.g., a feeling of increased expectations concerning availability). Regarding work characteristics, variables had to describe work-related aspects associated with our conceptualization of work characteristics (e.g., a change in flexibility or the perception of complexity).

Regarding the direction of effects, only studies that focused on the implementation or use of technologies for work-related purposes were included. Studies were excluded, if they (a) tested particular designs or features of technologies and evaluated them without considering effects on work characteristics, (b) regarded technology not as a specific tool but an abstract process (e.g., “digital transformation”), (c) were published before 1990 due to the fact that the extent of usability and usefulness of technologies before that time should be substantially limited compared to today (e.g., Gattiker et al., 1988 ), and (d) investigated the impact of technologies on society in general without a specific relation to professional contexts (e.g., McClure, 2018 ).

Studies that were found but that did not report empirical findings on the relationships between technology and work characteristics, but rather on the relationships between technology and work demands (e.g., specific knowledge or skills) or work outcomes (e.g., performance, job satisfaction) were documented. Since the aim for this study was to derive the work demands from the work characteristics in any case, the studies that reported a direct empirical relationship between technology and work demands were analyzed separately ( N = 7).

Data Extraction

The variables expressing technology and work characteristics were listed in a table, including the quantitative or qualitative data on the relationships. Pearson's r correlations were preferred over regression results to ensure comparability. For qualitative data, the relevant passages documenting data were included. Finally, methodological information as well as sample characteristics and size are listed.

Analysis of the Results

Firstly, the variables containing work-related aspects are clustered thematically into a comprehensive final set of work characteristics. This is necessary to reduce complexity due to variations in naming, operationalization and measurement and to make any patterns in the data more visible. Deviations from the theoretically expected clusters are noted and discussed before synthesizing the evidence narratively in accordance to the research questions ( Rodgers et al., 2009 ). As proposed, the evidence on changing work characteristics is analyzed with respect to the resulting work demands in the sense of knowledge, skills, attitude and behavior, which in turn are used to determine the implications for the different components of CVET.

Figure 2 depicts a flowchart documenting the literature search. In sum, 21 studies providing evidence on relationships between technology and work characteristics were included. In addition, seven supplementary studies containing empirical evidence on relationships between technology and specific work demands were identified. These studies are taken into account when deriving the work requirements. Next, the descriptive characteristics of the included studies will be reported. After that, the evidence on relationships between technologies and work characteristics of the 21 included studies will be summarized, before finally deriving the work demands based on the evidence found.

Figure 2 . Flowchart of literature search process.

Characteristics of Studies

Table 2 contains an overview of the characteristics of selected studies. Most of the studies were published between 2015 and 2019 (52%). Nearly half of the studies were conducted in Europe (48%), followed by North America (33%). Most of the studies reported qualitative data collected with methods such as interviews (62%).

Table 2 . Characteristics of the studies.

The studies investigated a variety of technologies, such as computers (1, 7), various forms of Information and Communication technologies (ICTs; 2, 3, 17, 18, 21) in a broad sense, including specific examples of work-extending technologies and other tools for digital communication, information technology (IT) systems supporting information dissemination and retrieval within organizations (4, 9), automated systems supporting predominantly physical work procedures (5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 14, 20), robots (15, 19), social media enabling professional networking and participation in organizational and societal practices (8, 16), and more domain-specific technologies such as clinical technology supporting professional decisions (9) and field technology for labor management (10).

Relationships Between Technology and Work Characteristics

In sum, nine work characteristics were identified and defined distinctively. Table 3 contains the operational definitions of the final work characteristics and the work-related aspects they consist of. The final work characteristics are: Workflow interruptions, workload, manual work, mental work, privacy, autonomy, complexity, role expectations, and opportunities for development.

Table 3 . Overview for final work characteristics and the exemplary work-related aspects assigned to them.

The complete overview of the selected studies and results for the relationships between technology and work characteristics is provided in Table 4 (for quantitative data) and Table 5 (for qualitative data). To further increase comprehensibility, the variables within the tables were labeled according to their function in the respective study (e.g., independent variable, mediating variable, dependent variable; see notes).

Table 4 . Studies providing quantitative evidence for the relationship between technology and work-related aspects.

Table 5 . Studies providing qualitative evidence for the relationship between technology and work-related aspects.

There is quantitative evidence on positive relationships between IT system use and complexity reported by two studies (4, 9). On a similar note, qualitative evidence suggests lower situational awareness within automated systems indicating an increase in complexity (12), and clinical technology being associated with an increase in complexity for nurses (9).

There is mixed quantitative evidence on the relationships between computer work and autonomy (1). The amount of computer work is positively related to autonomy, while technological pacing is negatively related to autonomy. Working within automated systems is negatively (5, 6) or not related (6) to different measures of autonomy. ICT use shows mixed relationships with job decision latitude (3) depending on ICT features that describe negative or positive effects of use. Evidence indicates a positive relationship between social media use and autonomy. Qualitative evidence suggests that ICT use increases autonomy (21) and flexibility (17, 18, 21).

Quantitative studies indicate strong positive relationships between computer work (1) and ICT use (2) and workload. The relationships are not consistent due to the fact that certain ICT features differ in their effects on workload. ICT characteristics such as presenteeism and pace of change are positively related to feelings of increasing workload, while a feeling of anonymity is negatively associated with workload. Evidence indicates positive relationships between time or workload pressure in the context of computer work (7), working in an automated system (5), as well as social media use (8) and provide evidence for positive relationships between various technologies and workload. Qualitative studies report similar outcomes. ICT use (18), automated systems (12, 13) as well as clinical technology (9) are reported to increase the workload.

Workflow Interruptions

Quantitative evidence indicates positive relationships between computer work and increasing levels of interruptions as well as an increasing demand for multitasking (7). Qualitative evidence suggests that ICT use is positively associated with an increased level of interruptions on the one hand and workflow support on the other hand (21). Further qualitative evidence suggests that robots at the workplace have positive effects on workflow support (19), and automated systems seem to increase the level of multitasking required in general (12).

Manual Work

Qualitative evidence suggests a decrease in the amount of physically demanding tasks when working with automated systems (11) and robots (15). In one study, qualitative evidence suggests an increase in manual work for technical jobs where automated systems are used (14).

Mental Work

Quantitative evidence indicates no relationships between monitoring tasks or problem-solving demands for technical jobs within automated systems (6). Qualitative evidence however suggests positive relationships between work within automated systems and various cognitive tasks and demands, such as problem-solving and monitoring (11, 13), while working with robots increases the amount of new and challenging mental tasks (15).

Quantitative evidence indicates that different ICT characteristics show different relationships with invasion of privacy (2). Some features are negatively related to invasion of privacy (anonymity) and others are positively related to it (presenteeism, pace of change). Qualitative evidence suggests that IT systems are not related to the perception of managerial surveillance (9), while social media is positively related to peer-monitoring (16), and field technology is negatively related to employee data control (10).

Role Expectations

Quantitative evidence indicates that ICT use is inconsistently related to role ambiguity depending on specific characteristics of the technology (2). Regarding automated systems, quantitative evidence indicates no relationship between working in an automated system and opportunities for role expansion in the form of an increased perceived responsibility (6). Qualitative evidence suggests that ICT use increases the expectations for availability and connectivity (21), and social media positively affects networking pressure (16). Qualitative evidence suggests that IT systems (9) decrease meaningful job content and role expansion. Qualitative evidence suggests that automated systems vary with regard to enhancing meaningfulness at work, dependent on whether the work tasks are complemented by the system or revolve around maintaining the system (20).

Opportunities for Development

Qualitative evidence suggests that ICT use (12) as well as working with an automated system (17) increase the demands for continuing qualification. Qualitative evidence suggests that opportunities for learning and development are prevalent with clinical technology (9) and absent when working with robots (19). Mixed qualitative evidence regarding automated systems and learning opportunities suggests that the effects depend on the differences in work roles in relation to being supported by the system or supporting the system (20).

A comprehensive summary of the outcomes can be found in Table 6 . The information in this table gives a summary of the evidence found for the different technologies and their relationships to work characteristics, more specifically to work related aspects. Important distinctive characteristics such as sample characteristics are listed in Tables 4 , 5 .

Table 6 . Overview over identified relationships between technology and work characteristics.

Subsequently, the results shown are now used as a basis for the identification of work demands that lead to the need for adapting to changes in work characteristics.

Relationships Between Technologies and Work Demands

Three sources are considered for the identification of work demands: Work demands mentioned in the studies on technology and work characteristics, work demands mentioned by the supplementary studies found during the database search ( N = 7), and work demands analytically derived from the results.

Some studies that examined the effects of technology on work characteristics also reported concrete work demands. Regarding the increasing complexity and the associated mental work, qualitative evidence suggests an increasing demand for cognitive as well as digital skills (11) in automated systems. With regard to IT systems, quantitative evidence indicates positive relationships with computer literacy (9), and analytical skills (4). With regard to the increase in workflow interruptions and the role expectations for constant availability and connectivity, time and attention management strategies are proposed in order to cope with the intrusive features of technology (2). Other strategies mentioned in the studies include self-discipline for disengaging from the ubiquitous availability resulting from mobile communication devices (18, 8) as well as the need for reflecting on individual responsiveness when working overtime due to self-imposed pressure to be available at all times (18, 21). Concerning opportunities for development, the willingness and ability to learn and adapt to technological changes and the associated changes in work (15, 4, 12) is emphasized. Moreover, employability is facilitated by using technological tools for professional networking (16).

The supplementary studies provide evidence on the direct relationships between technologies and work demands without the mediating consideration of work characteristics. This evidence is listed in Table 7 .

Table 7 . Supplementary studies on the relationship between technology and work-related demands.

There is quantitative evidence for positive relationships between the perception of controllability and exploratory use of computers (22), first-hand experience with robots and readiness for robotization (23, 24), and perceived usefulness and positive attitudes toward telemedicine technology (25), blockchain technology (26), and IT systems in general (27). Further quantitative evidence indicates mixed effects of perceived ease of use. Evidence indicates a positive relationship between perceived ease of use and perceived technological control with regard to telemedicine (25), no relationship between ease of use and attitude regarding blockchain technology (26), and a positive relationship between ease of use and attitude toward using IT systems (27). Quantitative evidence indicates that information processing enabled by technology is positively related to an increasing demand of cognitive skills (e.g., synthesizing and interpreting data) and interpersonal skills (e.g., coordinating and monitoring other people), but not related to an increasing demand in psychomotor skills (e.g., manual producing and precise assembling) (28). The level of standardization of work is positively related to interpersonal skills, but not related to cognitive and psychomotor skills (28). A high variety of tasks is positively related to the demand for cognitive skills and interpersonal skills and not related to psychomotor skills (28).

By analyzing the evidence on relationships between technology and work characteristics, further work demands can be derived. Knowledge about the specific technology at hand may be useful to decrease the perception of complexity as new technologies are introduced. This seems evident when comparing the effects of a simple computer with the effects of work within an automated system. For instance, while evidence indicates no relationship between computer work and complexity (6), work within an automated system is suggested to be associated with increasing complexity (12). Moreover, problem-solving skills (13) and cognitive skills such as diagnosing and monitoring (11, 15) increase when employees work within automated systems. Increasing autonomy suggests the need for personal skills regarding self-organizing and self-management due to greater flexibility and the associated possibilities for structuring work in many ways, particularly when working with ICTs (18, 21). Workflow interruptions and an increasing workload also increases the importance of communication skills for explicating the boundaries of one's own engagement to colleagues and leaders (17, 18, 21). Furthermore, reflecting the professional role at work may be critical due to changes in role expectations. The example of self-imposed need for availability underlines this argument (21). All this has implications for self-regulatory activities, such as reflection, and could benefit from experimenting and monitoring one's own strategies for time and attention management.

Implications for CVET: Objectives and Characteristics

The aforementioned studies describe several required behavioral aspects that are considered important due to technology at work. Emphasized is the need for components related to the organization of one's own work, namely self-discipline and time and attention management.

The identified need for reflection on one's own professional actions, for experimentation, and also for professional networking (for instance by using tools) can be seen as parts of further professional development by oneself or in interaction with others. In addition, the need for demonstrating employability is mentioned. From all these professional and career development aspects can be derived that problem-solving skills, self-regulation skills, and communication skills are required as well as proactive work behavior and coping and reflection strategies.

Various relevant skills, such as psychomotor skills, analytical skills, management skills, and interpersonal skills are mentioned. In addition, the need for diagnostic and monitoring skills as well as digital skills is emphasized. All these components can be used in relation to two explicitly mentioned needs: ability to learn and computer literacy. The demand for generic and transferable skills is emphasized. As a basis for the skills, knowledge is required, for instance on the technology itself, although not explicitly discussed in the studies. In contrast, several components of attitude are explicitly mentioned and considered to be a requirement for the ability to deal with challenges caused by new technologies at work. Firstly, the more generic willingness to learn, adaptability, and perceived behavioral control. Secondly, attitudes that are directly linked to technology, namely a positive attitude and trust, especially toward technology (e.g., robots), and technological readiness and acceptance.

Next to the opportunity of acquiring the mentioned components of competences at work, CVET can organize training interventions in the form of adequate learning environments to foster these. The ability of employees to carry out, develop and use the mentioned behavioral aspects, skills, knowledge, and attitudes, can be considered as required objectives of CVET and have concrete consequences for the characteristics of the learning environments.

As for the content of the learning environments, derived from the aforementioned requirements, it can be argued that attention should be paid to different categories of learning objectives: acquiring knowledge about and learning how to use technology, how to manage work and oneself, and how to continue one's own professional development. In addition, the relevance of attitude tells us that these components need to be fostered in the training and therefore need to be part of the content of the learning environments as well.

In relation to the methods or the didactics, only one study explicitly mentioned a suggestion, namely experience based learning for fostering adaptability (12). In relation to the guidance of trainers or teachers no suggestions are provided. The same goes for assessment, diagnoses or monitoring, and the coherence of components of the learning environments.

This systematic literature review aimed at identifying effects of new technological developments on work characteristics, identifying associated work demands, and determining their implications for the design of formal CVET learning environments.

Effects of New Technologies on Work Characteristics and Word Demands

Based on a systematic review focusing on empirical evidence, several effects of technology on work characteristics were found, thus answering RQ 1. Evidence suggests that complexity and mental work increases with ongoing automation and robotization of work, for instance due to the automatization of procedures which “hides” certain processes from employees. The automatization of tasks introduces new mental tasks, such as monitoring the machine's activities and solving problems. A decrease in manual work depends on the relation between the job and the technology in use (supporting vs. being supported).

Workload and workflow interruptions increase as a general consequence of the ubiquity of technology, mainly due to a higher level of job speed and the associated time and workload pressure. A higher level of autonomy seems to be associated with a higher workload and more workflow interruptions. This applies in particular to work with ICTs and domain-specific technologies, such as field technology.

Role expectations and opportunities for development depend on the relation between the job and the technology in use (supporting vs. being supported). With regard to role expectations, the need for being available or connected via digital devices and a new division of responsibilities between employees and technology are repeatedly mentioned in the studies. This applies particularly to work with automated systems, robots, and domain-specific technologies such as clinical technology.

With regard to work demands, employees need strategies to deal with higher levels of workload, autonomy, and complexity. Required skill demands contain mental, analytical, cognitive, and self-regulatory demands. In addition, opportunities for role expansion and learning, which do not seem to automatically result from the implementation and use of new technologies, need to be created (pro)actively by the employees. Employees need to take more responsibility with regard to their own development and professional work identity (for instance considering the pressure for constant availability). They need to be able to effectively deal with a high workload and number of interruptions, increasing flexibility, complexity, and autonomy, a demand for constant availability, changes in meaningfulness of tasks, changes in work roles, and the need to create and use learning opportunities. In the light of ongoing changes and challenges, skills to further develop and adapt one's own skills gain in importance. Regarding attitudes, the willingness to learn, adapt and experiment may be a central work demand.

Implications for the Practice of CVET

Various required objectives of CVET can be concluded from the reported results. For instance, developing the ability of employees to carry out the mentioned behaviors, as well as the skills, knowledge and attitudes that are necessary for those behaviors. These objectives have consequences for the content of CVET learning environments. From the empirical studies on the relationships between technology and work, we derived the need for employees to organize their own work, for instance through time management. Furthermore, many issues relating to own professional development and career development are important, to acquire individually and independently as well as by interacting with others. Ultimately, this refers to the skills of self-initiated learning and development. With regard to fostering helpful attitudes, raising awareness of the relevance of trust or training the social skills to promote trust in the workplace can be included in the content of CVET learning environments. In research on creating trust within organizations, regularly giving and receiving relevant information was shown to be important for creating trust toward co-workers, supervisors and top-management, which in turn fostered the perception of organizational openness and employee involvement as a result ( Thomas et al., 2009 ). In the research on creating trust in virtual teams, the importance of frequent interaction was important to develop trust on a cognitive as well as an affective level (e.g., Germain, 2011 ). These research results however need to be adapted to the context of technology at work.

Although there is no information provided on the guidance of employees, informal guidance through leadership ( Bass and Avolio, 1994 ) as well as formal guidance by trainers and teachers during interventions contain possibilities for fostering the required competences. Attention should be paid not only to acquiring relevant knowledge (digital literacy), but also to skills in applying the knowledge and therefore dealing with technology. Even more challenging might be the task of supporting attitude development (e.g., technological acceptance and openness to changes), fostering transfer of skills, and preparation for future development. Especially future professional development, which includes the ability to learn in relation to current and future changes, needs to be focused on. Teachers, trainers and mentors need to be equipped to be able to foster these competences.

In relation to the use of didactical methods, methods that do not merely focus on knowledge acquisition but also provide opportunities for skill acquisition and changes in attitude need to be applied. For example, one study explicitly suggested experience based learning for fostering the adaptability of employees when faced with ongoing technological developments. Other solutions for instruction models as a profound basis for learning environments may be found in more flexible approaches, for instance according to the cognitive flexibility theory ( Spiro et al., 2003 ), where learners are meant to find their own learning paths in ill-structured domains. By applying such models, that are often based on constructivist learning theories, in a coherent way, the development of strategies for self-organizing and self-regulation may be facilitated.

Furthermore, the use of technology within learning environments may have the potential to increase participants interactions, which are focused in for instance collaborative and co-operative learning ( Dillenbourg et al., 2009 ). Next to increasing interactions in learning and being able to co-operate, technology in learning environments can used to foster the other required competences, if adequately designed ( Vosniadou et al., 1996 ; Littlejohn and Margaryan, 2014 ).

When keeping in mind, that the coherence of components is an important requirement for the design of learning environments ( Mulder et al., 2015 ), the component that describes assessment needs further attention. There is evidence supporting the idea, that the type of assessment has an impact on how learning takes place ( Gulikers et al., 2004 ; Dolmans et al., 2005 ). Therefore, it can be used to deliberatively support and direct learning processes.

Only when all these aspects are considered can CVET interventions effectively and sustainably foster the mentioned objectives, such as promoting a willingness to change in relation to technologies, the effective use of technology, and personal development in the context of technological developments.

Limitations and Implications for Future Research

Regarding the search methods, the use of databases is challenging when investigating technologies ( Huang et al., 2015 ). Technological and technical terms are widespread outside the research in which they are regarded as the object of investigation. Therefore, it produces a large amount of studies that concern technology with diverse research objectives that can be difficult to sort. An interesting focus for future research would be the systematic mapping of journals dealing specifically with technology in order to identify research that could complement the results of the present study as well as consider specificities regarding the domains in which the data is collected and disciplines by which the research is conducted. For instance, domain-specific databases from healthcare or manufacturing might provide additional insights into the effects of technology on work. Another limitation is the absence of innovative new technologies, such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, or the internet of things as object of investigation. Broad technological categories, such as ICTs and social media have received some attention in research, especially in relation to questions beyond the scope of this review. Newer technological developments as discussed by Ghobakhloo (2018) are virtually not present in current research. This gap in empirical research needs to be filled. In addition, future research should ensure that it does not miss opportunities for research where effects of these innovative technologies can be examined in detail, for instance by conducting an accompanying case study of the implementation process. Research investigating changes over time regarding the use of technology and its effects is needed. In doing so, research could capture the actual dynamics of change and development of processes as they happen in order to inform truly effective interventions in practice. Moreover, a classification of technological characteristics according to their effects may be valuable by enabling a more in-depth analysis of new technologies and their effects on specific groups of employees and different types of organizations. These analyses will also allow a breakdown of effects in relation to differences in jobs, hierarchy levels and levels of qualification, which could be very important for organizations and employers in order to adapt the CVET strategy to the specific demands of specific groups of employees. The present review takes a first step in this direction by identifying work characteristics that are affected by different technologies. In addition, future research could also take into account non-English language research, which might increase insight in for instance cultural differences in the use and the effects of technology at work.

Regarding theory, some of the relevant theories considering technology stem from sociology (e.g., Braverman, 1998 ) or economics ( Autor et al., 2003 ). For instance, the task-based approach ( Autor et al., 2003 ) showed some explanatory value by suggesting that complexity may increase as a consequence of technology. Furthermore, it suggested that this effect may depend on job specifics. Those propositions are reflected in the aforementioned empirical evidence. Psychological theories on work characteristics do not conceptualize technology explicitly (e.g., Hackman and Oldham, 1975 ; Karasek, 1979 ). As of the present study, the large variation regarding the concepts and variables derived from theory might limit the comparability of results. To foster systematic research, further theory development needs to more explicitly consider the role of technology at multiple levels (i.e., individual level, team level, organizational level) and with regard to the characteristics and demands of work. In the context of theory, the paradigmatic views also deserve attention (e.g., Liker et al., 1999 ; Orlikowski and Scott, 2008 ). These views could be reflected in the subject of research, as exemplified for instance in the study of field technologies and its effects on privacy from a managerial control and power perspective, potentially reflecting the view of political interest ( Tranvik and Bråten, 2017 ). Most of the studies, however, do not take a clear stand on what exactly they mean when they investigate technology. This complicates interdisciplinary inquiry and integration, as it is not always clear which understanding of technology is prevalent. We therefore encourage future research to explicitly define technology, for instance as in the present paper using the proposed framework of McOmber (1999) . In doing so, characteristics of technology may be defined more clearly and distinctive which in turn would enable the formation of the strongly needed categorization of technologies, as was proposed earlier.

And, although there are theories and models on the use of technology in education (e.g., E-Learning, Technology enhanced learning), they are not focussing on fostering the competences required to deal with new technologies in a sustainable manner. In general, the same gap needs to be filled for instruction models and instructional design models, for instance to promote changes in attitude and professional development. In addition, there is hardly any attention for the consequences of new technologies at work for CVET yet ( Harteis, 2017 ). All this requires more systematic evaluation studies. The research gaps identified need to be filled in order to provide evidence-based support to employees in dealing with new technologies at work in a sustainable manner, taking charge of their own performance and health, as well as seeking and using opportunities for their own professional and career development.

Data Availability Statement

All datasets generated for this study are included in the article/supplementary material.

Author Contributions

PB and RM have jointly developed the article, and to a greater or lesser extent both have participated in all parts of the study (design, development of the theoretical framework, search, analyses, and writing). The authors approved this version and take full responsibility for the originality of the research.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

* Amick, B. C., and Celentano, D. D. (1991). Structural determinants of the psychosocial work environment: introducing technology in the work stress framework. Ergonomics 34, 625–646. doi: 10.1080/00140139108967341

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Autor, D. H. (2013). The “task approach” to labor markets: an overview. J. Labour Market Res. 46, 185–199. doi: 10.1007/s12651-013-0128-z

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Autor, D. H. (2015). Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. J. Econ. Perspect. 29, 3–30. doi: 10.1257/jep.29.3.3

Autor, D. H., Levy, F., and Murnane, R. J. (2003). The skill content of recent technological change: an empirical exploration. Q. J. Econ. 118, 1279–1333. doi: 10.1162/003355303322552801

* Ayyagari, R., Grover, V., and Purvis, R. (2011). Technostress: technological antecedents and implications. MIS Q. 35, 831–858. doi: 10.2307/41409963

Baartman, L. K. J., and de Bruijn, E. (2011). Integrating knowledge, skills and attitudes: conceptualising learning processes towards vocational competence. Educ. Res. Rev. 6, 125–134. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2011.03.001

Bass, B. M., and Avolio, B. J. (1994). Transformational leadership and organizational culture. Int. J. Public Administr. 17, 541–554. doi: 10.1080/01900699408524907

Bell, D. (1976). The coming of the post-industrial society. Educ. Forum 40, 574–579. doi: 10.1080/00131727609336501

Blauner, R. (1967). Alienation and Freedom: The Factory Worker and His Industry. Oxford: Chicago University of Press.

Google Scholar

* Bordi, L., Okkonen, J., Mäkiniemi, J.-P., and Heikkilä-Tammi, K. (2018). Communication in the digital work environment: implications for wellbeing at work. NJWLS 8, 29–48. doi: 10.18291/njwls.v8iS3.105275

Braverman, H. (1998). Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.

Brynjolfsson, E., and McAfee, A. (2014). The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies. New York, NY: Norton.

Burns, T., and Stalker, G. M. (1994). The Management of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

* Calitz, A. P., Poisat, P., and Cullen, M. (2017). The future African workplace: the use of collaborative robots in manufacturing. SA J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 15, 1–11. doi: 10.4102/sajhrm.v15i0.901

Card, D., and DiNardo, J. E. (2002). Skill-biased technological change and rising wage inequality: some problems and puzzles. J. Labor Econ. 20, 733–783. doi: 10.1086/342055

Cascio, W. F., and Montealegre, R. (2016). How technology is changing work and organizations. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 3, 349–375. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062352

** Chau, P. Y.K., and Hu, P. J.-H. (2002). Investigating healthcare professionals' decisions to accept telemedicine technology: an empirical test of competing theories. Inform. Manage. 39, 297–311. doi: 10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00098-2

* Chen, W., and McDonald, S. (2015). Do networked workers have more control? The implications of teamwork, telework, ICTs, and social capital for job decision latitude. Am. Behav. Sci. 59, 492–507. doi: 10.1177/0002764214556808

Cherns, A. (1976). The principles of sociotechnical design. Hum. Relations 29, 783–792. doi: 10.1177/001872677602900806

* Chesley, N. (2014). Information and communication technology use, work intensification and employee strain and distress. Work Employ. Soc. 28, 589–610. doi: 10.1177/0950017013500112

** Chow, S. K., Chin, W.-Y., Lee, H.-Y., Leung, H.-C., and Tang, F.-H. (2012). Nurses' perceptions and attitudes towards computerisation in a private hospital. J. Clin. Nurs. 21, 1685–1696. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03905.x

Dillenbourg, P., Järvela, S., and Fischer, F. (2009). “The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning: from design to orchestration,” in Technology-Enhanced Learning , ed N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, and S. Barnes (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), 3–19.

Dolmans, D. H., De Grave, W., Wolfhagen, I. H., and van der Vleuten, C. P. (2005). Problem-based learning: future challenges for educational practice and research. Med. Educ. 39, 732–741. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02205.x

* Dvash, A., and Mannheim, B. (2001). Technological coupling, job characteristics and operators' well-being as moderated by desirability of control. Behav. Inform. Technol. 20, 225–236. doi: 10.1080/01449290116930

Ellström, P.-E. (1997). The many meanings of occupational competence and qualification. J. Euro Industr. Train. 21, 266–273. doi: 10.1108/03090599710171567

* Findlay, P., Lindsay, C., McQuarrie, J., Bennie, M., Corcoran, E. D., and van der Meer, R. (2017). Employer choice and job quality. Work Occupat. 44, 113–136. doi: 10.1177/0730888416678038

Ford, M. (2015). Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Francis, A. (1986). New Technology at Work. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Frey, C. B., and Osborne, M. A. (2017). The future of employment: how susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 114, 254–280. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019

Gattiker, U. E., Gutek, B. A., and Berger, D. E. (1988). Office technology and employee attitudes. Soc. Sci. Comp. Rev. 6, 327–340. doi: 10.1177/089443938800600301

* Gekara, V. O., and Thanh Nguyen, V.-X. (2018). New technologies and the transformation of work and skills: a study of computerisation and automation of Australian container terminals. N. Technol. Work Employ. 33, 219–233. doi: 10.1111/ntwe.12118

Germain, M.-L. (2011). Developing trust in virtual teams. Perf. Improvement Q. 24, 29–54. doi: 10.1002/piq.20119

** Ghani, J. A., and Deshpande, S. P. (1994). Task characteristics and the experience of optimal flow in human—computer interaction. J. Psychol. 128, 381–391. doi: 10.1080/00223980.1994.9712742

Ghobakhloo, M. (2018). The future of manufacturing industry: a strategic roadmap toward industry 4.0. J. Manuf. Tech. Manage. 29, 910–936. doi: 10.1108/JMTM-02-2018-0057

* Gough, R., Ballardie, R., and Brewer, P. (2014). New technology and nurses. Labour Industry 24, 9–25. doi: 10.1080/10301763.2013.877118

Gulikers, J. T. M., Bastiaens, T. J., and Kirschner, P. A. (2004). A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. ETR&D 52, 67–86. doi: 10.1007/BF02504676

Hackman, J. R., and Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. J. Appl. Psychol. 60, 159–170. doi: 10.1037/h0076546

Harteis, C. (2017). “Machines, change and work: an educational view on the digitalization of work,” in The Impact Digitalization in the Workplace: An Educational View , ed C. Harteis (New York: Springer), 1–10.

Heisig, U. (2009). “The deskilling and upskilling debate,” in International Handbook of Education for the Changing World of Work: Bridging Academic and Vocational Learning , ed R. Maclean and D. Wilson (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), 1639–1651.

* Holden, R. J., Rivera-Rodriguez, A. J., Faye, H., Scanlon, M. C., and Karsh, B.-T. (2013). Automation and adaptation: Nurses' problem-solving behavior following the implementation of bar coded medication administration technology. Cognition Technol. Work 15, 283–296. doi: 10.1007/s10111-012-0229-4

Huang, Y., Schuehle, J., Porter, A. L., and Youtie, J. (2015). A systematic method to create search strategies for emerging technologies based on the Web of Science: illustrated for ‘Big Data’. Scientometrics 105, 2005–2022. doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1638-y

* James, K. L., Barlow, D., Bithell, A., Hiom, S., Lord, S., Oakley, P., et al. (2013). The impact of automation on pharmacy staff experience of workplace stressors. Int. J. Pharm. Pract. 21, 105–116. doi: 10.1111/j.2042-7174.2012.00231.x

** Kamble, S., Gunasekaran, A., and Arha, H. (2019). Understanding the Blockchain technology adoption in supply chains-Indian context. Int. J. Product. Res. 57, 2009–2033. doi: 10.1080/00207543.2018.1518610

Karasek, R., Brisson, C., Kawakami, N., Houtman, I., Bongers, P., and Amick, B. (1998). The Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ): an instrument for internationally comparative assessments of psychosocial job characteristics. J. Occupat. Health Psychol. 3, 322–355. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.3.4.322

Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: implications for job redesign. Administr. Sci. Q. 24, 285–308. doi: 10.2307/2392498

* Körner, U., Müller-Thur, K., Lunau, T., Dragano, N., Angerer, P., and Buchner, A. (2019). Perceived stress in human-machine interaction in modern manufacturing environments-results of a qualitative interview study. Stress Health 35, 187–199. doi: 10.1002/smi.2853

* Kraan, K. O., Dhondt, S., Houtman, I. L.D., Batenburg, R. S., Kompier, M. A.J., and Taris, T. W. (2014). Computers and types of control in relation to work stress and learning. Behav. Inform. Technol. 33, 1013–1026. doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2014.916351

Liker, J. K., Haddad, C. J., and Karlin, J. (1999). Perspectives on technology and work organization. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 25, 575–596. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.25.1.575

Littlejohn, A., and Margaryan, A., (eds.). (2014). Technology-Enhanced Professional Learning: Processes, Practices and Tools. New York, NY: Routledge.

* Marler, J. H., and Liang, X. (2012). Information technology change, work complexity and service jobs: a contingent perspective. N. Technol. Work Employ. 27, 133–146. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-005X.2012.00280.x

McClure, P. K. (2018). ‘You're Fired,’ says the robot: the rise of automation in the workplace, technophobes, and fears of unemployment. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 36, 139–156. doi: 10.1177/0894439317698637

McOmber, J. B. (1999). Technological autonomy and three definitions of technology. J. Commun. 49, 137–153. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02809.x

Mulder, R. H., and Baumann, S. (2005). “Competencies of in-company trainers,” in Bridging Individual, Organisational, and Cultural Aspects of Professional Learning , eds H. Gruber, C. Harteis, R. H. Mulder, and M. Rehrl (Regensburg: S. Roderer Verlag), 105–109.

Mulder, R. H., Messmann, G., and König, C. (2015). Vocational education and training: researching the relationship between school and work. Eur. J. Educ. 50, 497–512. doi: 10.1111/ejed.12147

* Ninaus, K., Diehl, S., Terlutter, R., Chan, K., and Huang, A. (2015). Benefits and stressors - perceived effects of ICT use on employee health and work stress: an exploratory study from Austria and Hong Kong. Int. J. Qual. Stud. Health Well Being 10:28838. doi: 10.3402/qhw.v10.28838

Orlikowski, W. J., and Scott, S. V. (2008). 10 sociomateriality: challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. ANNALS 2, 433–474. doi: 10.1080/19416520802211644

Parker, S. K., van den Broeck, A., and Holman, D. (2017). Work design influences: a synthesis of multilevel factors that affect the design of jobs. Acad. Manage. Ann. 11, 267–308. doi: 10.5465/annals.2014.0054

Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension. New Work, NY: Doubleday.

Roblek, V., Meško, M., and KrapeŽ, A. (2016). A complex view of industry 4.0. SAGE Open 6:215824401665398. doi: 10.1177/2158244016653987

Rodgers, M., Sowden, A., Petticrew, M., Arai, L., Roberts, H., Britten, N., and Popay, J. (2009). Testing methodological guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. Evaluation 15, 49–73. doi: 10.1177/1356389008097871

Schwab, K. (2017). The Fourth Industrial Revolution. London: Portfolio Penguin.

Shepard, J. M. (1977). Technology, alienation, and job satisfaction. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 3, 1–21.

Sonntag, K. (1992). Personalentwicklung in Organisationen [Human Resource Development in Companies. Psychological Basics, Methods, and Strategies]. Göttingen: Verlag für Psychologie.

** Spell, C. S. (2001). Organizational technologies and human resource management. Hum. Relat. 54, 193–213. doi: 10.1177/0018726701542003

Spenner, K. I. (1990). Skill: meanings, methods, and measures. Work Occupat. 17, 399–421. doi: 10.1177/0730888490017004002

Spiro, R. J., Collins, B. P., Thota, J. J., and Feltovich, P. J. (2003). Cognitive flexibility theory: hypermedia for complex learning, adaptive knowledge application, and experience acceleration. Educ. Technol. 43, 5–10. Available online at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44429454 (accessed April 28, 2020).

Thomas, G. F., Zolin, R., and Hartman, J. L. (2009). The central role of communication in developing trust and its effect on employee involvement. J. Bus. Commun. 46, 287–310. doi: 10.1177/0021943609333522

* Towers, I., Duxbury, L., Higgins, C., and Thomas, J. (2006). Time thieves and space invaders: technology, work and the organization. J. Org. Change Manage. 19, 593–618. doi: 10.1108/09534810610686076

* Tranvik, T., and Bråten, M. (2017). The visible employee - technological governance and control of the mobile workforce. Socio Econ. Stud. 28, 319–337. doi: 10.5771/0935-9915-2017-3-319

** Turja, T., and Oksanen, A. (2019). Robot acceptance at work: a multilevel analysis based on 27 EU countries. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 11, 679–689. doi: 10.1007/s12369-019-00526-x

** Turja, T., Taipale, S., Kaakinen, M., and Oksanen, A. (2019). Care workers' readiness for robotization: identifying psychological and socio-demographic determinants. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 4:67. doi: 10.1007/s12369-019-00544-9

* van Zoonen, W., and Rice, R. E. (2017). Paradoxical implications of personal social media use for work. N. Technol. Work Employ. 32, 228–246. doi: 10.1111/ntwe.12098

Vosniadou, S., Corte, E. de, Glaser, R., and Mandl, H., (eds.). (1996). International Perspectives on the Design of Technology-Supported Learning Environments. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

* Walden, J. A. (2016). Integrating social media into the workplace: a study of shifting technology use repertoires. J. Broadcast. Electr. Med. 60, 347–363. doi: 10.1080/08838151.2016.1164163

Weick, K. E. (1990). “Technology as equivoque,” in Technology and Organizations , ed P. S. Goodman and L. Sproull (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass), 1–44.

Zuboff, S. (1988). In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power. New York, NY: Basic Books.

* Zubrycki, I., and Granosik, G. (2016). Understanding therapists' needs and attitudes towards robotic support. The roboterapia project. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 8, 553–563. doi: 10.1007/s12369-016-0372-9

* Studies included in the systematic review.

** Supplementary studies.

Keywords: technology, work characteristics, continuous vocational education and training, automation, work demands, systematic review

Citation: Beer P and Mulder RH (2020) The Effects of Technological Developments on Work and Their Implications for Continuous Vocational Education and Training: A Systematic Review. Front. Psychol. 11:918. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00918

Received: 14 February 2020; Accepted: 14 April 2020; Published: 08 May 2020.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2020 Beer and Mulder. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Patrick Beer, patrick.beer@ur.de

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Essay on Science and Technology for Students and Children

500+ words essay on science and technology.

Essay on Science and Technology: Science and technology are important parts of our day to day life. We get up in the morning from the ringing of our alarm clocks and go to bed at night after switching our lights off. All these luxuries that we are able to afford are a resultant of science and technology . Most importantly, how we can do all this in a short time are because of the advancement of science and technology only. It is hard to imagine our life now without science and technology. Indeed our existence itself depends on it now. Every day new technologies are coming up which are making human life easier and more comfortable. Thus, we live in an era of science and technology.

Essentially, Science and Technology have introduced us to the establishment of modern civilization . This development contributes greatly to almost every aspect of our daily life. Hence, people get the chance to enjoy these results, which make our lives more relaxed and pleasurable.

Benefits of Science and Technology

If we think about it, there are numerous benefits of science and technology. They range from the little things to the big ones. For instance, the morning paper which we read that delivers us reliable information is a result of scientific progress. In addition, the electrical devices without which life is hard to imagine like a refrigerator, AC, microwave and more are a result of technological advancement.

Furthermore, if we look at the transport scenario, we notice how science and technology play a major role here as well. We can quickly reach the other part of the earth within hours, all thanks to advancing technology.

In addition, science and technology have enabled man to look further than our planet. The discovery of new planets and the establishment of satellites in space is because of the very same science and technology. Similarly, science and technology have also made an impact on the medical and agricultural fields. The various cures being discovered for diseases have saved millions of lives through science. Moreover, technology has enhanced the production of different crops benefitting the farmers largely.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

India and Science and Technology

Ever since British rule, India has been in talks all over the world. After gaining independence, it is science and technology which helped India advance through times. Now, it has become an essential source of creative and foundational scientific developments all over the world. In other words, all the incredible scientific and technological advancements of our country have enhanced the Indian economy.

Looking at the most recent achievement, India successfully launched Chandrayaan 2. This lunar exploration of India has earned critical acclaim from all over the world. Once again, this achievement was made possible due to science and technology.

In conclusion, we must admit that science and technology have led human civilization to achieve perfection in living. However, we must utilize everything in wise perspectives and to limited extents. Misuse of science and technology can produce harmful consequences. Therefore, we must monitor the use and be wise in our actions.

{ “@context”: “https://schema.org”, “@type”: “FAQPage”, “mainEntity”: [{ “@type”: “Question”, “name”: “List some benefits of science and technology.”, “acceptedAnswer”: { “@type”: “Answer”, “text”: “Science and Technology helps us to function daily comfortably. It has given us railway systems, TV, refrigerator, internet and more.” } }, { “@type”: “Question”, “name”: “Name the most recent achievement of India with the help of science and technology.”, “acceptedAnswer”: { “@type”: “Answer”, “text”:”India most recently launched Chandrayaan 2 successfully. This lunar exploration helped India make a distinctive place amongst the other developed countries.”} }] }

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Table of Contents

Importance and benefits of technology, types of technological innovations and their uses, how has technology changed our lives, technology in our daily lives, types of roles in the field of technology, what is the importance of technology.

Technology has witnessed impressive evolution in the past few decades, which has in turn transformed our lives and helped us evolve with it. Right from roadways, railways, and aircraft for seamless travel to making communication effortless from any part of the world, technology has contributed more than anything to help mankind live a life of luxury and convenience.

It is also because of technology that we know our world and outer space better. Every field owes its advancement to technology, and this clearly indicates the importance of technology in every aspect of our lives, including the highest paying tech jobs . In the upcoming sections, we elaborate on the importance, benefits, and impact of technology. 

It is impossible to exaggerate the significance of technology in today's fast-paced world on all fronts. The way we work, communicate, and solve complicated problems has changed dramatically as a result, making technical proficiency and digital literacy more important than ever. Enrolling in a java full stack developer course can be a big step for people who want to succeed in the IT business.

There is continuous work and progress in the area of technology as it offers significant benefits. And these benefits have a huge impact on our day-to-day lives and the operations of countless industries, such as healthcare, automobile, communication, manufacturing, and business, among others. With that said, here are ways in which technology is both important and immensely beneficial:

1. Added Efficiency

Organizations constantly struggle with the goal of maximizing their output while reducing the inputs. This is where technology is a game changer, especially automation. With automated processes, repetitive and redundant operations take minimal time or labor while ensuring expected output.

2. Faster Decision Making

With technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning , it has become easier than ever to handle large volumes of data and make crucial business decisions based on the insights derived from the data. In addition to this, technological resources add accuracy to the decision-making process as they reduce the scope of errors from manual operations.

3. Cost and Time-Saving

Since machines are way faster than humans, certain tasks that may require an incredible amount of manual work and attention to detail can be easily accomplished with the help of technology. Technology also ensures improved accuracy.

Further, the use of technology in certain areas can also help save significant costs. For instance, transitioning to digital communication from paper-based communication and engaging machines in tasks that might take a lot more time to complete can help save costs.

4. Competitive Edge

In today’s day and age when organizations compete neck and neck, technology can be one aspect that empowers a company to outdo its competition. Oftentimes, technology also serves as a USP or something that sets the company apart from others in the eyes of potential clients and customers. With access to advanced technology, companies have the opportunity to create better products, which can ultimately help them improve their sales. 

5. Increased Innovation

Technology has proven to be the most useful resource for almost any industry to move forward and make progress. Upgrades not only help organizations step up but they also ease the operations for employees as well as people in general. This underlines the importance of technology in making innovations, which has a large-scale benefit.

While technology finds its application in several fields and subfields, there are mainly three broad types of technological innovation, which are as follows:

1. Semi-radical Technology

Semi-radical technology builds up on the technological knowledge that already exists. However, it aims to improve the already existing knowledge in ways that bring about innovation. For instance, smartphone brands keep rolling out newer versions of hardware with better features from time to time.

2. Disruptive Technology

Disruptive technology is a whole new innovation in a specific area, which disrupts an existing technology by making the innovation more accessible. It essentially makes for the best alternative by challenging the usefulness or relevance of the current technology. One of the best examples of disruptive technology is streaming music via various apps, such as Spotify and Apple Music, which has made the practice of downloading songs on a device almost obsolete.

3. Incremental Technology

Incremental technology, seemingly similar to semi-radical technology, differs from it in a sense that it focuses on making smaller innovations to the already existing technological aspect. However, the smaller innovations contribute to significant improvement of a product. Upgrading the versions of operating systems, releasing security patches, or making modifications to the existing services of a company are all examples of incremental technology.

Become a Software Development Professional

Full stack java developer.

• Kickstart Full Stack Java Developer career with industry-aligned curriculum by experts
• Hands-on practice through 20+ projects, assessments, and tests

Full Stack Web Developer - MEAN Stack

• Comprehensive Blended Learning program
• 8X higher interaction in live online classes conducted by industry experts

Technology is immensely useful both personally and professionally. While the way we live our lives has changed significantly with every technological innovation, it is just as true for businesses and industries, such as healthcare, education, construction and architecture, and entertainment—to name a few. With that said, here’s how technology has changed different spheres of our lives:

1. Technology Makes Collaboration Easy 

We live in a world where collaboration is essential, and technology has transformed how we collaborate. Businesses specifically benefit a lot from the collaborative advantages of technological innovations that allow communication from any part of the world through virtual means. With this, businesses can tap into opportunities to expand globally or reach out to a wider audience with more ease.

2. Technology Helps New Businesses

Today, technology empowers entrepreneurs to start new ventures and raise capital by offering a wide range of options. People with ideas can find ways to implement them and turn their ideas into the next big thing, create transformative business plans, and take their initial steps to start a business with more convenience. Technology also offers the advantage of easy scalability while improving both customer sales and employee processes.

3. Technology Helps Create More Equality in Society

Technology has made it possible for people from all walks of life to have access to different resources. Further, technology is also being used to equip people who need a certain type of assistance to improve their quality of life and help them avail opportunities that would otherwise be inaccessible.

For instance, with technological advancements, people with blindness or hearing difficulties can be provided assistance using technology. Further, health-related tools, such as artificial joints and cardiovascular implants help people with certain disabilities or health conditions to have an improved quality of life.

Technology has become an indispensable part of our daily lives. Everything we do right from starting our day to ending it involves some form of technology. One of the reasons why technology, no matter what field, has been a focus area for scientists and other professionals and stakeholders is that it adds convenience to our day-to-day activities while saving us time and improving our quality of life.

Right from our smartphones which are useful to us in more ways than we can imagine to various kitchen appliances, computer systems, means of communication, transport system, and online shopping (to name a few) have changed how we live our lives compared to a decade ago. The sheer benefits that technology bestows on our lives in smaller and bigger senses account for the continuous work in the direction of making further progress in technological innovations.

Since technology is associated with every possible field you can think of, the types of roles in the field of technology are limitless. However, some roles are a lot more in demand in the current times than others. Information technology is one such field, with job roles such as data scientists , software developers , cyber security experts , and computer programmers being lucrative options.

Beyond the field of IT, fields like medical, space, robotics, superintelligence, pharmaceuticals, education, business, and automobile technology witness the scope for great advancements, thus creating many opportunities for individuals who aim to explore new technological possibilities in the respective fields.

Hope this article was able to give you a clear understanding about the importance of technology in our lives. If you are looking to enhance your technological and software skills further, we would recommend you check Simplilearn’s Post Graduate Program in Full Stack Web Development in collaboration with Caltech CTME. This course can help you hone the right skills, stay updated with the latest technologies, and become job-ready in no time.

If you have any questions or queries, feel free to post them in the comments section below. Our team will get back to you at the earliest.

1. Why is technology important to students?

Technology, especially in current times, is of great importance to students as it facilitates seamless learning and online education, providing access to up-to-date information.

2. How does technology make our lives easier?

Technology lends immense support in automating various tasks, setting up reminders, communicating efficiently, paying bills at the click of a button, and shopping for the simplest things, such as groceries to investing in valuable assets right in the comfort of our homes.

3. How will technology help us in the future?

With technology, there is an increased scope for financial stability, understanding investment and tapping into new opportunities without requiring expert knowledge, and growing businesses even with minimal investments. All these aspects will help us be equipped with the help we need to pursue any endeavor with readiness in the future.

4. Can technology help save lives?

Various technologies, such as robotic surgery simulators, home defibrillators, diagnostic devices, and the use of AI and machine learning have proven to be very useful in saving lives.

Our Software Development Courses Duration And Fees

Software Development Course typically range from a few weeks to several months, with fees varying based on program and institution.

Get Free Certifications with free video courses

Software Development

Getting Started with Full Stack Java Development

Full-Stack Development 101: What is Full-Stack Development ?

Learn from Industry Experts with free Masterclasses

Learn to Develop a Full-Stack E-Commerce Site: Angular, Spring Boot & MySQL

Fuel Your 2024 FSD Career Success with Simplilearn's Masters program

Mean Stack vs MERN Stack: Which Tech Stack to Choose in 2024?

Recommended Reads

Blockchain Career Guide: A Comprehensive Playbook To Becoming A Blockchain Developer

Importance of Social Media in Today's World

Study the Importance of Types of Networks: LAN, MAN, and WAN

Free eBook: Top 25 Interview Questions and Answers: Big Data Analytics

The Importance of Defining Project Acceptance Criteria in Your Projects

Hadoop Technology

Get Affiliated Certifications with Live Class programs

• PMP, PMI, PMBOK, CAPM, PgMP, PfMP, ACP, PBA, RMP, SP, and OPM3 are registered marks of the Project Management Institute, Inc.

Essay on Technology Development in India

Students are often asked to write an essay on Technology Development in India in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Technology Development in India

Introduction.

India has seen rapid technology development. This growth has improved lives and boosted the economy.

Technology in Education

Technology has transformed education in India. Digital classrooms and online learning have made education accessible to everyone.

Healthcare Technology

In healthcare, technology has enabled telemedicine and e-health services. This has improved healthcare access in rural areas.

Technology in Business

Businesses have benefited from technology, with e-commerce and digital payments becoming popular. This has boosted the economy.

Technology development in India continues to grow, promising a brighter future for all.

250 Words Essay on Technology Development in India

India, a country known for its rich cultural heritage, has been making significant strides in technology development. The rapid advancements have not only revolutionized the urban landscape but also penetrated the rural regions, transforming the nation into a digital powerhouse.

Information Technology and Software Services

India’s Information Technology (IT) sector has been a major contributor to the country’s economic growth. The IT-BPM (Business Process Management) industry has made India a global outsourcing hub, creating millions of jobs and contributing significantly to the GDP. The development of software services, IT parks, and special economic zones has fostered innovation and entrepreneurship.

Telecommunication

The telecommunication sector in India has witnessed exponential growth with the advent of affordable smartphones and cheap data services. The introduction of 4G, and the impending launch of 5G, has improved connectivity, paving the way for digital inclusivity.

Space Technology

India’s space technology, spearheaded by ISRO, has garnered international acclaim. The successful missions to the moon (Chandrayaan) and Mars (Mangalyaan) have positioned India as a formidable player in space exploration.

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning

India is making significant strides in the field of AI and ML. With a plethora of startups focusing on AI-based solutions, India is poised to become a global leader in this domain.

In conclusion, the development of technology in India is a testament to the nation’s resilience and adaptability. As the country continues to embrace the digital revolution, it is essential to address the digital divide and ensure technology benefits all strata of society equally.

500 Words Essay on Technology Development in India

India, a country with a rich history and a fast-growing economy, has made significant strides in the field of technology. The country’s tech development has been marked by a series of remarkable achievements, from the establishment of prestigious institutes like the Indian Institutes of Technology to the launch of the Mars Orbiter Mission. This essay delves into the development of technology in India and its implications for the country’s future.

The Emergence of the IT Sector

India’s technological journey began in earnest with the emergence of the Information Technology (IT) sector in the 1990s. The liberalization of the Indian economy played a crucial role in this development, attracting foreign investments and paving the way for the growth of IT companies. Today, India’s IT sector is a global powerhouse, contributing significantly to the country’s GDP and providing employment to millions.

India’s prowess in space technology is another testament to its technological advancements. The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) has achieved several milestones, including the successful launch of the Mars Orbiter Mission, making India the first Asian country to reach Mars. These achievements have not only put India on the global space map but also highlighted its capabilities in advanced technology and research.

Start-up Ecosystem

The start-up ecosystem in India has also witnessed exponential growth, driven by technological innovation. With the government’s supportive policies and initiatives like ‘Start-up India’, young entrepreneurs are leveraging technology to solve a myriad of problems, from healthcare to education. This has led to the birth of several unicorns and has positioned India as a global innovation hub.

Challenges and Opportunities

Despite these achievements, India faces several challenges in its technological journey. Issues such as digital divide, lack of infrastructure, and inadequate investment in research and development pose significant hurdles. However, these challenges also present opportunities for growth. For instance, the digital divide can be bridged through initiatives like the Digital India campaign, which aims to make government services digitally accessible to all citizens.

In conclusion, technology development in India has been a journey of remarkable growth and innovation. The country has made significant strides in various fields, from IT to space technology. However, to sustain this momentum and achieve its vision of becoming a global technology leader, India needs to address the existing challenges and capitalize on the opportunities that lie ahead. The future of technology in India holds immense potential, and with the right strategies, the country can harness this potential to drive its socio-economic development.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Social Problems in India
• Essay on Unemployment in India
• Essay on Indian Politics

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Technological Development Essays

Romer: why, indeed, america article critique, popular essay topics.

• American Dream
• Artificial Intelligence
• Black Lives Matter
• Bullying Essay
• Career Goals Essay
• Causes of the Civil War
• Child Abusing
• Civil Rights Movement
• Community Service
• Cultural Identity
• Cyber Bullying
• Death Penalty
• Depression Essay
• Domestic Violence
• Freedom of Speech
• Global Warming
• Gun Control
• Human Trafficking
• I Believe Essay
• Immigration
• Importance of Education
• Israel and Palestine Conflict
• Leadership Essay
• Legalizing Marijuanas
• Mental Health
• National Honor Society
• Police Brutality
• Pollution Essay
• Racism Essay
• Romeo and Juliet
• Same Sex Marriages
• Social Media
• The Great Gatsby
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• Time Management
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Violent Video Games
• What Makes You Unique
• Why I Want to Be a Nurse
• Send us an e-mail

ESSAY SAUCE

FOR STUDENTS : ALL THE INGREDIENTS OF A GOOD ESSAY

Essay: A modern technological development in our society

Essay details and download:.

• Subject area(s): Information technology essays
• Reading time: 4 minutes
• Price: Free download
• Published: 28 October 2015*
• File format: Text
• Words: 863 (approx)
• Number of pages: 4 (approx)

Text preview of this essay:

This page of the essay has 863 words. Download the full version above.

It’s agreeable that, Technological progress has merely provided us with more efficient means for going whether forwards or backwards as well. Technology has enable Us to increase our comfort and to achieve efficiency in all sectors of life .without technology ,we can’t achieve any progress or development . thanks to technology ,we can modernize our industry so life becomes easier for us and next generations .despite advantages mentioned above, there are drawbacks of technology . so we can consider technology is a servant but a bad master. There are some modern technological developments that play a major role in making our daily life more effective . television is ,no doubt, a good servant .it’s the cheapest source of information and entertainment nowadays .TV has a big influence in our life . It can be an educational tool. there is a considerable variety of TV programmes which give us instruction as well as education . there are , for examples , some programmes for educating adult illiterates and others for teaching foreign languages . besides ,a lot of films, plays and series are presented time at home . Television also provides outlet for creative talents . many playwrights ,actors emerged from television . color TV has given greater opportunities for such talents. However ,television is a bad master . it has a negative effect on our behavior It encourages us to accept violence and to be inactive and unimaginative. it occupies most of our time . thus , we have no time left to pursue our hobbies , listen to music or read books . it also regulates our free time . we rush home ,gulp food and then sit in complete silence before the TV screen . Many television channels broadcast violent films and programs. The more our children see violence on television , the less sensitive they become to it . So , violence doesn’t seem wrong . We can also notice that violence on television doesn’t seem to have consequence s . An actor who is killed in a film an hour ago ,can be seen laughing in another program . This may confuse with reality and we forget killing must be permanent Television also encourages passive enjoyment it is a tool to cut us off from the real world .We become less active . We do nothing except turning it on and changing the channels . We can’t even move around to practice sports . we get little so lazy and of course we will suffer from physical diseases . we choose to spend a fine day in semi ‘darkness ,glued to our sets , rather than go out into the world itself. Besides , its bad effect concerning social relationship, we notice that TV cuts the soul of gathering people in one trend . In addition, we notice the bad morals that spread in society among people . Crimes spread as a result of bad films and forcing scenes . social illnesses prevail over the countries Addiction to watching TV acts as a hindrance to our imagination . Stories are told for us . We don’t even have to imagine what the place of stories look like On my opinion . television can tight relations . News and other information , we see on television gives us topics to discuss with our friends and family . Television also helps us to understand each other better as we all have access to its programmes . TV can help us share our interests with other people . Television programmes give us topics to think about . Now we can know about news in a few minutes after they happen all over the world . For example , now we know about those who die of birds flu minutes after the event . We all like to discuss these matters with other people . So , Television news and information programmes help us to discuss our ideas with others . No matter where you live ,you have access to many television channels . You can watch television programmes and movies of many other foreign countries . through them you can get information about many different cultures . When you go to a new city to work , study or take a vacation , you will already have something in common with the people there . Where you meet new people ,you will probably be familiar with at least some of the television programs they watch . The gives you something to talk about and a way to begin new friendships Most people use television as a way to pursue their interest . People who play sports usually like to watch sports on television . Those who like to cook prefer to watch cooking programs . Television encourage s communication among people . Television is a tool that gives access to information and entertainment as well as education . You can share others’ interests effectively Technology is also needed to raise our standard of living . our homes are more comfortable and use fewer energy recourses thanks to improvements in home construction techniques as well as computer technology . without technology we couldn’t have treatments for heart diseases thanks to progress in medicine From the above ‘ mentioned lines we come to a conclusion that says “technology is good ” Without it there would be no change ,no improvement s in our economy ,our standard of living , or our health . Hence , We can’t deny the necessity of technology.

...(download the rest of the essay above)

About this essay:

If you use part of this page in your own work, you need to provide a citation, as follows:

Essay Sauce, A modern technological development in our society . Available from:<https://www.essaysauce.com/information-technology-essays/essay-a-modern-technological-development-in-our-society/> [Accessed 25-04-24].

These Information technology essays have been submitted to us by students in order to help you with your studies.

* This essay may have been previously published on Essay.uk.com at an earlier date.

Essay Categories:

• Accounting essays
• Architecture essays
• Business essays
• Computer science essays
• Criminology essays
• Economics essays
• Education essays
• Engineering essays
• English language essays
• Environmental studies essays
• Essay examples
• Finance essays
• Geography essays
• Health essays
• History essays
• Hospitality and tourism essays
• Human rights essays
• Information technology essays
• International relations
• Leadership essays
• Linguistics essays
• Literature essays
• Management essays
• Marketing essays
• Mathematics essays
• Media essays
• Medicine essays
• Military essays
• Miscellaneous essays
• Music Essays
• Nursing essays
• Philosophy essays
• Photography and arts essays
• Politics essays
• Project management essays
• Psychology essays
• Religious studies and theology essays
• Sample essays
• Science essays
• Social work essays
• Sociology essays
• Sports essays
• Types of essay
• Zoology essays

The Effect of Technology on the Environment Essay

Introduction, the impact of new technologies on the development of the society.

The twentieth century has witnessed rapid development of new technologies; it stands to reason, that their impact on the environment cannot be underestimated. At the present moment, humankind has to resolve one of the most complicated dilemmas in its history, in particular how to achieve equilibrium between the needs of people or (probably it would be better to say public good ) and the risks to the Earth. One has to admit that in the vast majority of cases, human activities have only detrimental effects on nature, and under some circumstances, scientific achievements may easily aggravate these effects. In this essay, I would like to focus on energy technologies, because they often pose the major threat to the environment.

Overall, there are many means of generating and harnessing energy, but none of them can be regarded as safe. At this point, it is hardly possible to imagine our life without power stations, electricity, and so forth. One can hardly deny that these are constituent and almost inseparable parts of our life. Yet, the risk they present to people and nature are almost unpredictable. In order to substantiate this statement, we may refer to specific examples, such as nuclear power plants. Its explosion can leave a great number a people dead, as it actually happened in the USSR in 1986. The so-called Chernobyl catastrophe has always been a warning to us. Even now, there are many victims to this disaster, and it is impossible to predict when the consequences will be alleviated.

At first glance, it may seem that the only possible solution to problem is to substitute these technologies by safer ones. In fact, many countries prefer not to have nuclear power stations. Certainly, such policy is rather prudent, because it ensures that the environment is not imperiled. Nonetheless, we should say that such approach is not always applicable, because there are some states, which simply cannot afford such transition. The thing is that nuclear power is by far the cheapest way of generating energy, and occasionally it is the most optimal solution, especially, if we are speaking about the developing world. Thus, it is necessary to take into consideration socio-economic factors. Another issue, which should not be overlooked, is the availability of natural resources.

In some regions, nuclear power is the only way of solving energy problem. It goes without saying that we must attach primary importance to long-term policies but the transition to ecologically safe technologies may sometimes lead to severe recession and economic crisis, especially in third-world countries. Perhaps, it is of crucial importance to exercise constant supervision over power plants and bring at least gradual improvements, which may eventually make this technology more reliable. Apart from that, there are many cases, which also illustrate this dilemma, for instance, the extraction of oil in the Pacific Ocean. A great number of people protest against such practice. Nevertheless, even they have to admit that in the near future, it will be the only alternative.

It is possible to come up with several suggestions regarding this issue. First and foremost, we need to emphasize the fact that people will exploit the resources of the nature for a certain period of time, after that they will become entirely depleted. Therefore, it is necessary to devise lest expensive and safe means of generating energy. In the meantime, we need to consider socio-economic situation in a particular region, in some cases, financial assistance should rendered to those countries, who cannot, independently, cope with this problem.

There is a widely held opinion among many philosophers and scholars that new technologies affect the development of human society. Overall, it seems that these are two variables that are so closely interwoven, and it is hardly permissible to separate them from one another. Occasionally, it is the society, which gives rise to new technologies, because there is popular demand for them. Sometimes, this process may be reversed. There are several cases, which can illustrate this process. For example, the supporters of the Marxist society may argue that scientific discoveries or inventions may contribute to further stratification of the community. The thesis comes down to the following: a person, who is able to purchase and utilize the achievements of engineers or constructors, will be able to dictate terms to other people. In order to support their argument, they refer to the so-called Industrial Revolution, which began in the United Kingdom in the eighteenth century. The invention of steam engine or spinning machine resulted in the stratification of the then society, because only very few could buy these devices, and subsequently use them for their purposes.

However, it may happen vice versa as well. The development of science and technology may be motivated by the demand of the community. For instance, at the end of the nineteenth century, there was a necessity to develop more effective means of communication. It stands to reason; there was an immediate response to this demand, namely the advent of telephone and radio.

It is extremely difficult to predict how these relations between the society and technology will develop in the near future. In this respect, we need to discuss the concept of technocracy. Traditionally, it is defined as a political system according to which engineers or scientists take control of the state. It seems that there is a slightly different scenario. Perhaps, the helm will be taken not by scientists, engineers or the inventors of new technologies, but by those ones who hire them. There is sufficient evidence, indicating that this prognosis is not something unrealistic. Big corporations have always attracted the attention of the public, but this issue still requires thorough examination, because for a considerable amount of time the government took somewhat laisser-faire approach to new technologies and economy. Consequently, leading companies (there is no need to name them in this essay) have transformed into de facto or real rulers of many countries. It may seem that new technologies only aggravate the situation, but one should take into consideration that science, itself, is always impartial, it is supposed to work for the sake of all members of the community. Thus, the government must ensure that new technology does not turn into a means of control. Perhaps, some changes in the legislation are needed, especially, concerning, the anti-monopolistic laws, which still allow corporations to control the market and subsequently the world.

Therefore, it is quite possible for us to arrive at the conclusion that new technologies and society can be considered as two interdependent variables, their development is a two-sided process. It is not quite appropriate to presume that only new scientific achievements influence the community. Yet, it has to be admitted that the situation, which has recently emerged, suggests that very soon people, possessing new technologies will come to power, which means that the rest of the world will become completely dependant on them. In order to avoid this disaster, it is necessary to review already-existing legislation, which enables this organization to achieve dominant positions.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, October 31). The Effect of Technology on the Environment. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-effect-of-technology-on-the-environment/

"The Effect of Technology on the Environment." IvyPanda , 31 Oct. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/the-effect-of-technology-on-the-environment/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'The Effect of Technology on the Environment'. 31 October.

IvyPanda . 2023. "The Effect of Technology on the Environment." October 31, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-effect-of-technology-on-the-environment/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Effect of Technology on the Environment." October 31, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-effect-of-technology-on-the-environment/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Effect of Technology on the Environment." October 31, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-effect-of-technology-on-the-environment/.

• The History of the Ertan Dam and Its Use for Generating Electricity
• Labor Economy Generating Factors
• Nuclear Energy Benefits
• Nuclear Energy in Australia
• Ecological Problems Play Little Role in Generating Violent Conflict
• Entrepreneurship: Generating a Business Plan
• Renewable Energy: Wind Generating Plant for the Local Community
• Nuclear Energy: Safe, Economical, Reliable
• Should Production of Nuclear Power Be Stopped?
• Nuclear Power Use Controversies
• Biodiversity Hotspots and Environmental Ethics
• Ecosystem and the Biosphere: Effect of Human Activities
• Acid Rain - Causes and Effects
• Las Vegas Water Shortage
• Industrial Pollution in China and USA

The technological development essay

The paper will give an overview of the current developments that have occurred over a period of a few years for the world and what effect they will have in the future. There is an assumption that is made for the development, that in synchronization of the past trend, it is assumed that the future trend will also be the same. Hence, it can be said the technological development will continue to take place and there will be a number of changes that will take place in the way we do things. The paper will append a few sources in APA format.

Development in Technology There has been an exponential growth in the development of technology. This means that there has been a lot of development in the variety of technology that is being built as well as the fact that the use of technology in daily life has also increased for an average middle income family. The use of television in various households began a number of decades back and the use of television and the internet have also increased. These are two of the ways that the technology is used.

There are various other ways that the technology can be used so that there is further understanding of the choices that are available for development. It is known and stated by a number of researchers that there is plenty of room for the technology to grow. There are a number of directions that technology can take the human brain and then the human brain can also think up of various ways of using technology. It is all a vicious cycle that goes on with the objective of allowing technology to grow.

As it is said by Marlene, “The combination of the telephone and the Internet will provide more uses and conveniences than imagined just ten years ago. The telephone is likely to be the pivotal technology, so that people will have personal numbers that can be taken with them as they transfer from job to job, and home to home. It is already possible to use the telephone for receiving email messages and surfing the net. ” (Maheu, 2007 ) According to this researcher, there are a number of ways in which the telephone can be explored for different uses.

Related essays:

• The Social Effects of Increased Mobile Phone Usage essay
• Mobile Phone Security essay
• American history essay
• TABLE OF CONTENTS essay

She says that the virtual lovers will also be allowed to get closer with one another so that there are no problems of communicating. All excuses of long distance communication will be defeated and there will now be short distance calling, wherever the individuals are situated. “Mobile phone carriers now allow you to pick a variety of news, sports, weather, and stock market reports several times a day. Telephones and Internet services are merging, bringing increased opportunities for virtual lovers to be in email or voicemail contact through telephones.

” (Maheu, 2007 ) However, the paper should discuss the effect of television and the print ads on the advertising techniques that will be adopted by a company. The three ways that can be recognized to bring a change in the advertising channels used by companies are the following: 1. Mobile phones will take charge that will in turn require the companies to send the individual mobile service providers with their advertisements. 2. Mobile televisions will need to have the advertisements shown on them as well through specific satellites for catering to an elite class.

3. The internet would require motion advertisements and print ads to be provided extensively for helping to attract several people. Currently, a number of companies use print ads as well television ads in a combination in order to promote the products and the services that they are selling. “Depending on its size, your business probably spends anywhere from $1000 to $10000 a month on marketing and advertising. This is how you reach new customers and grow your business.

The common outlets are radio, network TV, cable TV, and newspaper. ” (Shayne, 2006 ) All these techniques and channels are used as a combination for different target markets because there are a number of people who get to read the newspaper everyday whereas there are some that only but when they see and get attracted to a certain bill board in town. Hence, there is a need for the companies to come up with different ways of attracting customers because all these channels have been exhausted.

It can be said that the traditional advertising channels will not be completely eradicated such as bill board and banners because these all will be used to target those individuals who can not afford to buy the expensive channels that have been described above and hence, there is a need to think of the benefit of these people as well. The companies can use the billboards for such people in order to get the message across. The “bottom of the pyramid” individuals should not be ignored because they also provide a large contribution to the success and the profits of the company.

This is why a lot of stress is being provided to advertising for all target markets. The following section will provide an overview of what technological developments will take place in the coming future and what effect these changes will have on the way the companies will attract and advertise to their current target market. This is a challenge for the company that must be fulfilled so that there is a competitive edge over all other companies that would be achieved. How Advertising a Product/Service Will Be Impacted By the Changing Technology

“The website should include nice graphics, fast load times, as well as an accurate presentation of your business. The website also needs to be optimized for search engine visibility which is not the same thing as search engine submission, or Meta tags. When done properly, your Internet investment can easily provide you with years of valuable advertising at a cost that is nominal compared to other outlets. ” (Shayne, 2006 ) The companies will have to concentrate on advertising on the internet.

The reason for such a decision is that the internet is a growing field and there are a number of people who would now rather check their mails over the internet on their mobile. The mobile phones have been a great invention and it allows the individual to have various options that he / she can perform in order to save time. The main concept of today’s world is to work hard to survive and this means that any individual will need to keep up with the fast moving pace of the world.

If he / she stop for a while, there is a chance that he / she may be left behind. This is the rule of the world that has now been observed. One of the products and services that will be changed due to technology would be the increased use of mobile phones and mobile televisions that will be used extensively in daily lives. Currently, a mobile phone is a necessity but it will grow even further in the next ten years and this is due to the reason that the television programs will be watched on the mobile phone individually.

So which constraints, there is a chance that even the television options will be shifted on the phone where the company will now have to sell their advertisements to the mobile companies. It is already observed that televisions have come into cars in order to provide them with traveling assistance in the car. The companies would have to think of shorter ads where the idea is sent across faster than any other message so that there is not much time of the individual that is wasted in watching the ad in order to get the idea of the product and the benefits that are attached to it after use.The technology of television and mobile phones will continue to merge till there is no room for improvement.

Bibliography

Maheu, Marlene M. (2007). The Future Of Cyber-Sex And Relationship Fidelity: A Brave New World Booklet. Retrieved on March 7, 2007 from: http://www. selfhelpmagazine. com/booklet/growth. html Shayne. (2006). Fort Smith’s Advertising Channels, Website VS Traditional Media. Retrieved on March 7, 2007 from: http://www. kirkhamsystems. com/node/68