Desarrollos tecnológicos en Colombia: superando categorías de oposición.

Andrés Valderrama; q

doi:10.48160/18517072re27.394

Authors

Andrés Valderrama Grupo de Investigación sobre Tecnología y Sociedad, Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad de Los Andes.
q Grupo de Investigación sobre Tecnología y Sociedad, Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad de Los Andes.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48160/18517072re27.394

Keywords:

model of diffusion, dominant-dominated, modernity, transmilenio, programa Madre Canguro

Abstract

This article analyzes conceptualizations of technology innovation from two theoretical traditions: the model of technology diffusion and the concepts of dominant-dominated. These theories are confronted with the cases of a fast bus system; the “Transmilenio” and a healthcare method; the “Madre Canguro” program; that are two techno-scientific innovations made in Bogota, Colombia. The aim is to criticize those theoretical traditions which oversimplifies reality by using oppositional categories in their explanations, which is caracteristic of the eurocentric project of modernity. We criticize this point of view by suggesting some elements for a new analysis based on a mix of Science and Technology Studies (STS) and the Latin American Project of Modernity/Coloniality recent theoretical developments. We consider that this new vision could be helpful in order to re-conceptualize the role of technology and innovation within the Western world.

References

Ardila, A. (2004), “Transit Planning in Curitiba and Bogotá. Roles in Interaction, Risk, and Change”, disertación doctoral, mit, Cambridge.

Basalla, G. (1967), “The Spread of Western Science”, Science, 156, (3775), p. 611.

Bijker, W. (1995), Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change, Cambridge y Londres, The MIT Press.

Castro Gómez, S. (2005), La poscolonialidad explicada a los niños, Popayán, Editorial Universidad del Cauca, Instituto Pensar.

Chatterjee, P. (1997), “El Estado nacional”, en Rivera, S. y R. Barragán (comps.), Debates postcoloniales. Una introducción a los estudios de la subalternidad, La Paz, Editorial Historias, pp. 211-233.

De Laet, M. y A. Mol, (2000), “The Zimbabwe Bush Pump: Mechanics of a Fluid Technology”, Social Studies of Science, 30, (2), pp. 225-263.

Edgerton, D. (1999), “From Innovation to Use: Ten (Eclectic) Theses on the History of Technology”, History and Technology, 16, (2), pp. 1-26.

Escobar, A. (2003), “Mundos y conocimientos. De otro modo: el programa de investigación de modernidad/colonialidad latinoamericano”, Tabula Rasa, (1), pp. 51-86.

Flyvbjerg, B.; M. Holm y S. Buhl (2002), “Underestimating Costs in Public Works Projects: Error or Lie?”, Journal of the American Planning Association, 68, (3), pp. 279-295.

Gerth, H. H. y C. Wright Mills (1946), From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, Nueva York, Oxford University Press.

Guha, R. (1997), “Sobre algunos aspectos de la historiografía colonial de la India”, en Rivera, S. y R. Barragán (comps.) Debates postcoloniales. Una introducción a los estudios de la subalternidad, La Paz, Editorial Historias, pp. 25-32.

Hidalgo, D. (2005), “Comparación de alternativas de transporte público masivo. Una aproximación conceptual”, Revista de Ingeniería, (21), Bogotá, Universidad de Los Andes, pp. 95-105.

Hughes, T. P. (1993), Networks of Power. Electrification in Western Society, 1880-1930, Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Kuhn, T. S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.

Levinson, H. et. al. (2003),tcrp Report 90 Bus Rapid Transit. Volume 1. Case Studies in Bus Rapid Transit, Transit Cooperative Research Program, Washington, Transportation Research Board.

Mol, A. (2002), The body multiple: ontology in medical practice, Durham y Londres, Duke University Press.

Quijano, A. (2000), “Colonialidad del poder, eurocentrismo y América Latina”, en Lander, E. (Ed.), La colonialidad del saber: eurocentrismo y ciencias sociales. Perspectivas latinoamericanas, Buenos Aires, Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales, pp. 201-246.

Ruiz- Peláez, J. G. y N. Charpak (2005), “Sources of resistance to Kangaroo Mother Care (kmc), implementation in developing countries and proposed solutions”, conferencia presentada en el Foro Global sobre Investigación Médica, septiembre 12-16, Mumbai, India.

Ruiz-Peláez, J. G., N. Charpak y L. G. Cuervo (2004), “Kangaroo Mother Care, an example to follow from developing countries”, British Medical Journal, 329, (7475), pp. 1179-1181.

Schiebinger, L. (1993), “Why Mammals are Called Mammals: Gender Politics in Eighteenth-Century. Natural History”, American Historical Review, 98, (2), pp. 382-411.

Scott, J. C. (1990), Domination and the arts of resistance: hidden transcripts, Londres, Yale University Press.

Smith, M. R. y L .Marx (Eds.) (1994), Does Technology Drive History?, Cambridge, The MIT Press.

World Health Organization (2003), Kangaroo Mother Care: A Practical Guide, París, WHO.