Suchergebnisse

"The most fundamental difference between 'developing' and 'developed' societies is technology, in a broad yet specific sense"; so states the author of this important study, Liberation and Technology: Development possibilities in pursuing technological autonomy. The ways in which technology is developed, institutionalized, animated and celebrated, form the core of 'development' (human, economic, environmental, etc.) and ultimately civilization itself. But 'techno-spheres' are not only technical. They are also social, political, and ideological. For societies and countries that have long been kept from realizing their own prosperity and dignity, development is also liberation. The main treatise of this book is that each developing society ought to seek to achieve technological autonomy in its quest for positive transformations and prosperity for its people. Technological autonomy is about attaining a high level of self-determination in planning and managing technological affairs. Attaining endogenous capacity to guide and execute decisions on production and innovation; creating and transferring key technological products and services; steering relevant foreign and local investment as well as trade; setting own priorities of development free from external manipulation; are goals that must be central to such planning efforts. With evidence and argument, and in plain language, this book suggests a novel way of thinking about development, through envisioning and building better techno-social systems. For these reasons this book is a welcome addition to the body of ideas informing practitioners and theorists in the field of development--political leaders, economists, sociologists, engineers, technologists, scientists, scholars, planners and activists who are involved in relevant development processes and liberation struggles

This paper argues that international development research should be submitted to the oversight of research ethics committees from the countries where data will be collected. This includes research conducted by individuals who may fall outside the jurisdictions of most ethics guidelines or policies, such as individuals contracted by non-governmental organizations. The argument is grounded in an understanding of social justice that recognizes that not seeking local ethics approval can be an affront to the decolonization movement, and may lead to significant direct harms to participants. Local ethics oversight can help ensure projects appropriately take into consideration local laws, regulations, priorities and context. For example, a local research ethics committee may be in a better position than a foreign one to assess whether any given proposed project carries context-specific risks. In addition, submitting to a local research ethics committee is to acknowledge the legitimacy of local authorities, thereby taking a stance against the history of colonizing disempowerment. Local oversight is a mechanism to increase the accountability of researchers working abroad: if respect for local authority and tailoring to local context are to be upheld, there must be mechanisms to ensure that research that does not meet these requirements does not proceed. Objections based on the limited oversight capacity in some countries and on concerns related to the politicization of the review process are discussed. Finally, the roles and responsibilities of the various stakeholders in the implementation of greater local ethics oversight are laid out. ; Cet article fait valoir que la recherche sur le développement international devrait être soumise à la surveillance des comités d'éthique de la recherche dans les pays où les données seront collectées. Cela inclut les personnes ayant un statut qui leur permet de se soustraire des lignes directrices ou des politiques d'éthique, telles que les personnes engagées par des organisations non gouvernementales. L'argument repose sur une compréhension de la justice sociale qui reconnaît que ne pas rechercher l'approbation éthique au niveau local peut être un affront au mouvement de décolonisation et peut entraîner des dommages directs importants pour les participants. La supervision éthique au niveau local favorise une meilleure prise en compte des législations locales, des règlements, des priorités et du contexte. Par exemple, un comité d'éthique de la recherche local est souvent mieux placé qu'un comité étranger pour évaluer si un projet proposé comporte des risques spécifiques au contexte donné. En outre, le fait de soumettre un projet à un comité d'éthique de la recherche local permet de reconnaître la légitimité des autorités locales, prenant ainsi position contre l'histoire de la perte de pouvoir en lien avec la colonisation. La supervision locale permet d'accroître la responsabilité des chercheurs travaillant à l'étranger : si l'autorité locale et l'adaptation au contexte spécifique doivent être respectées, il doit y avoir des mécanismes pour s'assurer que la recherche qui ne satisfait pas à ces exigences ne peut avoir lieu. Les objections fondées sur la capacité limitée de supervision dans certains pays et sur les préoccupations liées à la politisation du processus d'évaluation sont abordées. Enfin, les rôles et les responsabilités des différentes parties prenantes dans la mise en œuvre d'une plus grande supervision éthique au niveau local sont définis.