Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
INNOVATIONSFORSOCIALLYCREATINGASUSTAINABLEFUTURE
(causede.g.byRussiaorbyJihadists).Theymaygenerateaninternationaleconomiccrisis,
anewarmsrace(goodforscienceandbusiness,badfortaxpayers),newnationalisms,and
ideologicalandreligiousclashes.Globalization,internationalcooperation,andtradecan
besloweddownandlimited.Suchasituationseemsstructuralinitsnature,andsuggests
thenewapproachesintheeconomicsareneeded,especiallyinthemodernunstableworld.
Todealwiththeaforementionedchallenges(therearemanymore)itisnecessary
toinventandapplywidely(e.g.inmainstreameconomicsandsociology)newappropriate
approachesandmethods.Historically,theprogressofsciencetookplacebymultiplying
newdirectionsofresearch,newsub-disciplines,andnewinstitutions.Paradoxically,itled
toincreasingspecializationandfragmentationofresearch.Thisunintended“procedural”
reductionismallowedforbetterunderstandingof“microcosm”butnotof“macrocosm”.
Alreadyafewdecadesago,systemsthinkers(e.g.E.Laszlo)andcyberneticianssug-
gestedaholisticandsystemicapproachwithawideruseofmodellingandsimulations
(madeeasierbytheaidofcomputers).Therewerecallsforinter-andtrans-disciplinary
approachesandresearch(evenapost-disciplinaryerawasannounced-seee.g.Zacher,
2006).However,sciencewas(andis)institutionalizedstructurally,organizationally,and
oftenpersonally.Networking-thankstoICTs-doesnotautomaticallyresultinasuc-
cessfulcooperation.Newproposalsareemergingthatareconnectedwithsuchconcepts
asComputationalSocialScienceandBigData,andtheuseofsupercomputerscanhelp.
Innovations-intellectual,organizational,andinstitutional-arebadlyneededtoover-
cometraditionalapproachesthatarenotcurrentlyfittingintoarapidlychangingreality.
Traditionallyproducedandoftenhistoricallybiasedknowledgealsohassomegenerational
dimension(Zacher,2009).Newgenerationsofscientistsbornandformattedas“digital
natives”mayhavelessrespectforoldtraditionsandaremorecomfortablewithnew,not
onlytechnicalcompetences.Howeversocalled“oldknowledge”isstillwidespreadand
strongineducation,inpeople’smindsandnotrarelyinscienceinstitutionsaswell.Deside-
ologizationcanbepostulatedinmanyscientificareasandinvestigations.Forexample,the
ideologyofunlimitedexponentialgrowthshouldbedebatedintermsofsystemsanalysis,
whichevidentlyshowsthattheEarthasaclosedsystem(withoutinputsfromoutside)
isnotabletoassurelivingspace,water,food,mineralresources,andasoundenviron-
menttoanevergrowingpopulation(seeMeadows,2004).Ideologistsbelieve(inareally
religiousmanner)thatitwillbepossible.Discussionsonthelimitstogrowth-spatial,
physical,environmental,financial,etc.-areoftennotrational.Unlimitedgrowthrequires
abundantresourcesthatarenotavailable.Moreover,itcanbecynicallystatedthatthanks
totheunderdevelopment(poverty,epidemics,shortlifeexpectancy,ethnicandreligious
wars)ofthemajorityofthehumanpopulationtheworldisstillinakindofstableequi-
librium.Thisissustainabilitymainlyfortherichanddominating.Tochangethissituation
aholisticandsystemicapproachisfundamentalintheory,politics,andactions.Thisissus-
tainabilitysciencewhichtriestoaddressalloftheissues,innovationsincluded,connected
withcontemporaryconditions,contexts,andchallengesofthepresentcomplex,diverse,
andendangeredworld.
Tochangeamind’sintellectualbaggageandalsomainstreamWeltanschauunginsci-
enceandinnovationareas,especiallyinaperspectiveofglobalscienceandtechnology
17