White Spaces Innovation in Sweden - Innovation policy for ... - Vinnova

More documents

Recommendations

Info

WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDEN2.4 Why human complex systems are differentHuman systems are different from natural and biological because they are reflexivewhich means that we can learn. The major differentiator is that humans can communicateby the use of language which has been described as involving the coordination ofthe coordination of actions (Maturana and Varela (1980). Language can itself be seen ascomplex adaptive system but language and the communication and interaction it allowsaffect interplay between micro-macro levels in other systems. Humans are cognitiveagents set out to pursue purposeful action, i.e. action or intervention based on intentionsindividually and collectively. Here we should note Midgely´s (2000) suggestion that ifintervention is purposeful action by an agent to create change, then systemic interventionis purposeful action by an agent to create change in relation to reflection onboundaries. What he means is that there is a need for agents to reflect critically upon,and make choices between, boundaries. Boundaries define both what issues are to beincluded, excluded or marginalized in analyses, and who is to be consulted or involved(the two are obviously linked, as different agents will have different concerns). Becauseof the „who‟ question, issues of power and participation are unavoidable in systemicintervention.Language is important from an innovation point of view which has to do with characterof the “knowledge boundaries” that have to be crossed. These are referred to incommunications theory as syntactic, semantic and pragmatic boundaries and the higherthe novelty the more a need to be able communicate across the two latter categories ofboundaries (Star (1989), Carlile (2004) by making use of boundary objects. These inturn allows for complexity absorption (Boisot & Child, 1999). This is not the place toexpand further on these topics. They are mentioned because they may play an importantrole in coordination and sensemaking in the generative phases of ideas and concepts.The issue of intent and the consequences thereof make the issue of how boundariesare defined of interest. The more universally a system is defined the less influence ofindividual and perhaps even collective action.It is clear that in order to be recognisable as such, a system must be bounded in someway. But as Cilliers (2001) says, as soon as one tries to be specific about the boundariesof a system, a number of difficulties become apparent. For example, it seems uncontroversialto claim that one has to be able to recognise what belongs to a specific system,and what does not. But complex systems are open systems where the relationshipsamongst the components of the system are usually more important than the componentsthemselves. Since there are also relationships with the environment, specifying clearlywhere a boundary could be is not obvious. Cilliers suggest that we should think ofboundary as something that constitutes that which is bounded in order to see the boundaryas something enabling rather than as confining.As an illustration of this logic he presents the example of the eardrum. It forms theboundary between the inner and the outer ear, but at the same time, it exists in order to32
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENlet the sound waves through. As a matter of fact, if it was not there, the sound waveswould not be able to get through at all! If the boundary is seen as an interface or membraneparticipating in constituting the system, we will be more concerned with the marginsof the system, and perhaps less with what appears to be central. A second boundaryissue concerns the “place” of the boundary. The propensity we have towards visualmetaphors inclines us to think in spatial terms. A system is therefore often visualised assomething contiguous in space. This tendency is reinforced by the prevalence of biologicalexamples of complex systems. We think of systems in an “organic” way. Socialsystems are obviously not limited in the same way. Parts of the system may exist intotally different spatial locations. This may be exemplified by clusters as geographicallydefined systems and at the same inhabited by actors belonging to different social worldsor systems where the overlaps between these different kind of boundaries constitutemuch of the governance issues related to horizontal innovation. And there is a discussionon boundaries there as well, especially if we include the cognitive and social aspectsin the governance discussion which was mentioned above.33
Page 3: White Spaces Innovation in SwedenIn
Page 9 and 10: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENSv
Page 11: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENgr
Page 14 and 15: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENin
Page 16: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENet
Page 19 and 20: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDEN1
Page 21 and 22: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENba
Page 25 and 26: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENgr
Page 27 and 28: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDEN2.
Page 29 and 30: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENTh
Page 31 and 32: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENpa
Page 33: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENTo
Page 37 and 38: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENof
Page 39 and 40: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENst
Page 41 and 42: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENAc
Page 43 and 44: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENal
Page 45 and 46: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENre
Page 49 and 50: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENMe
Page 51 and 52: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENFi
Page 55 and 56: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENen
Page 57 and 58: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENFi
Page 59 and 60: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENth
Page 67 and 68: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENAn
Page 69 and 70: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENai
Page 71 and 72: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENhe
Page 73 and 74: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENin
Page 75 and 76: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENHu
Page 79 and 80: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENti
Page 81: WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENdu
Page 84 and 85:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENFi
Page 86 and 87:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENre
Page 88 and 89:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENan
Page 90 and 91:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENse
Page 92:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDEN
Page 96 and 97:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENph
Page 98 and 99:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENan
Page 100 and 101:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDEN5
Page 102 and 103:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENpr
Page 104 and 105:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENFi
Page 106 and 107:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENwi
Page 108 and 109:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENki
Page 110 and 111:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENRe
Page 112 and 113:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENGu
Page 114 and 115:
WHITE SPACES INNOVATION IN SWEDENSt
Page 116 and 117:
VINNOVA ReportVR 2011:01 Hundra år
Page 118:
VINNOVA develops Sweden’s innovat
show all

White Spaces Innovation in Sweden - Innovation policy for ... - Vinnova

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?