Articles 3 and 4 deal with the inner dynamics in the regime level from the point of view of technology as intertwined with its environment. The question here is a study of a socio-technical system, which encompass production, diffusion and the use of technology that are interrelated and mutually dependent in practice (Geels 2004b). This perspective stresses that social and technical aspects are strongly interlinked, and the functioning of technology is dependent upon its relationship to other elements (Geels 2004b, 2005).
As Geels states, the stability of existing socio-technical systems occurs through interaction between the material aspects of the system, embedded actors and organisational networks, and the rules and regimes which guide perceptions and actions (e.g. Geels 2004b, see also Genus and Coles 2008). A socio-technical regime includes actors and artefacts, whose practices develop the rule set of the regime (Verbong and Geels, 2007) Artefacts are never used in vacuum, but always in an application domain, which is structured by regulations, user practices, symbolic meanings and maintenance organisations. This context is not merely passive, but actually helps the artefact fulfil a function (Geels 2005, 11 ) And, as I will argue, the study of the regime-level dynamics is not meaningless, because a contextual study of technology reveals its connections to the different perceptions of ageing, which also affects the policy level, which is also a decisive part of the transition.
In the study of socio-technical relationships, the focus is on safety alarm systems as they represent quite a simple and established technology for the elderly. For this reason, safety alarm systems can be seen as part of an existing and established socio-technical regime of elderly care: they have been in use since the 1980s. However, as several studies have noted, established technology also has a contextual nature and can be used in various ways in different contexts. The designers have also noted that a holistic approach to technology is needed; a step forward from user-centred design to a more holistic dimension is a life-based design (see e.g. Leikas 2009). In socio-technical analysis, the relationship between the technology and the user is more than diffusion (success of an innovation explained by emphasising the innovation’s intrinsic qualities) because technology and the social environment that adopts it, simultaneously shape each other. (Akrich et al. 2002a; 2002b )”To adopt an innovation is to adapt it.”(Akrich et al. 2002b, 209) The innovation is transformed, modified according to the site where it is implemented through multiple socio-technical negotiations (ibid).
The starting point of this part of dissertation is these above-mentioned negotiations at the regime level: between safety technology, perceptions of old age and perceptions of innovations, intermediated by the users and the care workers. The question is dealt with in the case of safety alarm systems, that are considered to be a piece of assistive technology for the elderly, but more careful consideration shows the many meanings of this technological apparatus. The basic argument here is that technology is not a separate entity, but is
9.2 Inner dynamics of the regime: socio-technical relationships in the case of safety alarm systems
Articles 3 and 4 deal with the inner dynamics in the regime level from the point of view of technology as intertwined with its environment. The question here is a study of a socio-technical system, which encompass production, diffusion and the use of technology that are interrelated and mutually dependent in practice (Geels 2004b). This perspective stresses that social and technical aspects are strongly interlinked, and the functioning of technology is dependent upon its relationship to other elements (Geels 2004b, 2005).
As Geels states, the stability of existing socio-technical systems occurs through interaction between the material aspects of the system, embedded actors and organisational networks, and the rules and regimes which guide perceptions and actions (e.g. Geels 2004b, see also Genus and Coles 2008). A socio-technical regime includes actors and artefacts, whose practices develop the rule set of the regime (Verbong and Geels, 2007) Artefacts are never used in vacuum, but always in an application domain, which is structured by regulations, user practices, symbolic meanings and maintenance organisations. This context is not merely passive, but actually helps the artefact fulfil a function (Geels 2005, 11 ) And, as I will argue, the study of the regime-level dynamics is not meaningless, because a contextual study of technology reveals its connections to the different perceptions of ageing, which also affects the policy level, which is also a decisive part of the transition.
In the study of socio-technical relationships, the focus is on safety alarm systems as they represent quite a simple and established technology for the elderly. For this reason, safety alarm systems can be seen as part of an existing and established socio-technical regime of elderly care: they have been in use since the 1980s. However, as several studies have noted, established technology also has a contextual nature and can be used in various ways in different contexts. The designers have also noted that a holistic approach to technology is needed; a step forward from user-centred design to a more holistic dimension is a life-based design (see e.g. Leikas 2009). In socio-technical analysis, the relationship between the technology and the user is more than diffusion (success of an innovation explained by emphasising the innovation’s intrinsic qualities) because technology and the social environment that adopts it, simultaneously shape each other. (Akrich et al. 2002a; 2002b )”To adopt an innovation is to adapt it.”(Akrich et al. 2002b, 209) The innovation is transformed, modified according to the site where it is implemented through multiple socio-technical negotiations (ibid).
The starting point of this part of dissertation is these above-mentioned negotiations at the regime level: between safety technology, perceptions of old age and perceptions of innovations, intermediated by the users and the care workers. The question is dealt with in the case of safety alarm systems, that are considered to be a piece of assistive technology for the elderly, but more careful consideration shows the many meanings of this technological apparatus. The basic argument here is that technology is not a separate entity, but is
Figure 4. The socio-technical dynamics in Articles 3-4.
The contextual nature of the safety alarm is based on the ontology of the dual nature of artefacts; besides the physical properties, they have institutional statuses that are made by collective action. (Pohjola 2007). There is a constitutional relationship between natural and institutional facts (see Searle’s constitutive rule, Chapter 7), and these constitutions are created through intentional action (Pohjola 2007, 71).
As shown in Articles 3 and 4, the safety alarm is much more than physical components. The technical properties of the safety alarm, like the size and stiffness of the alarm button, defines who is able to use the safety alarm. On the other hand, the institutional nature of the safety alarm means that the safety alarm is a safety alarm just because we believe so, and an institution is built around it. More broadly, the ways of using the safety alarm, and the ways to talk about it are part of creating the perceptions of ageing in our society. In the case of the safety alarm, it is not insignificant that that the safety alarm system is a large service network that consists of a variety of actors (e.g. Melkas 2004), that all constitute the technology.
The properties of the safety alarm button and its restrictive elements affecting its use, describes the nature of technology connected to social practices. Technology is not innocent, but in the terms of Madeleine Akrich, it has scripts; technical objects define a framework of action together with the actors and the space in which they are supposed to act. (Akrich 1992, 208). The question is how a technical object constrains actors (oractants, as Akrich refers to human and non-human actors) in the way they relate to the object and to one another, as well as actants reshaping the object, and the various ways the object may be used. (Akrich 1992, 206.) Technical artefacts have normative prescriptions. By prescriptions, Akrich means the behaviour imposed on the human by non-human actors. (Latour 1988). Ethical issues, rights and obligations are transformed into technological devices; the physical properties of artefacts often tell us the way we should behave. A heavy hotel key, for instance, made to be unwieldy to carry, imposes a rule upon the client to leave the key at the reception, or automatic
Figure 4. The socio-technical dynamics in Articles 3-4.
The contextual nature of the safety alarm is based on the ontology of the dual nature of artefacts; besides the physical properties, they have institutional statuses that are made by collective action. (Pohjola 2007). There is a constitutional relationship between natural and institutional facts (see Searle’s constitutive rule, Chapter 7), and these constitutions are created through intentional action (Pohjola 2007, 71).
As shown in Articles 3 and 4, the safety alarm is much more than physical components. The technical properties of the safety alarm, like the size and stiffness of the alarm button, defines who is able to use the safety alarm. On the other hand, the institutional nature of the safety alarm means that the safety alarm is a safety alarm just because we believe so, and an institution is built around it. More broadly, the ways of using the safety alarm, and the ways to talk about it are part of creating the perceptions of ageing in our society. In the case of the safety alarm, it is not insignificant that that the safety alarm system is a large service network that consists of a variety of actors (e.g. Melkas 2004), that all constitute the technology.
The properties of the safety alarm button and its restrictive elements affecting its use, describes the nature of technology connected to social practices. Technology is not innocent, but in the terms of Madeleine Akrich, it has scripts; technical objects define a framework of action together with the actors and the space in which they are supposed to act. (Akrich 1992, 208). The question is how a technical object constrains actors (oractants, as Akrich refers to human and non-human actors) in the way they relate to the object and to one another, as well as actants reshaping the object, and the various ways the object may be used. (Akrich 1992, 206.) Technical artefacts have normative prescriptions. By prescriptions, Akrich means the behaviour imposed on the human by non-human actors. (Latour 1988). Ethical issues, rights and obligations are transformed into technological devices; the physical properties of artefacts often tell us the way we should behave. A heavy hotel key, for instance, made to be unwieldy to carry, imposes a rule upon the client to leave the key at the reception, or automatic
violently slamming door mechanisms imply we should pass through quickly. (Latour 1988;
Latour 1992.) Technological devices, like the key, incorporate the mutual relationships between people. The same applies to the safety alarm, for example, in the case of false alarms, the technology creates the relationships between the user and the care person that would not otherwise exist.
The development of technology is not value-neutral; it is itself a social practice involving, for instance, ethical values. Likewise, ethical practices have material sides because they entail specific organisations of concrete interpersonal relationships that are always technologically embodied. (Widdershoven 1988, 105) The meaning of physical properties are essential for people with disabilities. They may be left outside if the physical environment does not enable one to use the technology. Besides high and low technology, the physical environment has scripts. This is connected to the view that disability can be viewed as not a person’s property, but as the property of relationship between a person and his or her environment. In this sense, all the environments that are inaccessible for older people because of physical restrictions can be seen to contain those scripts.
My point here is that the small-level contextual scripts can also form broader societal scripts, by which I mean that technological scripts contribute to defining old age at the society level.
Technology, through its usage, creates societal perceptions of old age, or perceptions of innovations of ageing, which, in their turn affect the formation of policies for innovation and ageing. For example, the discussion about older people as users of technology is one way to construct and reproduce the old age, which is seen for instance in the visions of the information society, where the elderly are considered to be a risk group in danger of being excluded from the information society (see e.g. Sankari 2004). However, there are various kinds of technology in the lives of older people and this technology plays various roles in society and in the every-day lives of older people. The discussion on the acquisition and use of the safety alarm reveal several aspects of old age, which can be handled as “age acts” or
“age speech” producing old age. Age based norms are maintained by ideologies which are resistant to change (Ginn and Arber 1995). Understanding how cultural perceptions of age are produced is important from the point of view of a service system, because public policies are often built on the basis of these (often stereotypical) perceptions (Rintala 1999).
Vakimo (2001) talks about age acts as one of the frequent ways to produce the cultural meanings of the old age. Age acts are every-day actions taken in social interaction, actions producing one’s own or other people’s social age, or actions defining oneself or others within the category of the elderly (Vakimo 2001, 37). Getting biologically old is an automatic and continuing process, but the social and cultural meanings of age are negotiated in every-day interaction situations. Leading one’s every-day life in terms of social actions that one considers to constitute part of an old person’s life can also be considered an age act. (Vakimo 2001, 37-38.) Walkers, walking sticks, etc, are often labelled as age-markers or signs of old age, (Featherstone and Hepworth 1991, see Leinonen and Rantamaa 2001). The use of assistive technology, such as safety alarms, can also be considered as an age act related to later life, while other technology, such as computers, mobile phones and console games are often considered to be part of the younger generation’s everyday life. Active participation in the information society can even be considered an
violently slamming door mechanisms imply we should pass through quickly. (Latour 1988;
Latour 1992.) Technological devices, like the key, incorporate the mutual relationships between people. The same applies to the safety alarm, for example, in the case of false alarms, the technology creates the relationships between the user and the care person that would not otherwise exist.
The development of technology is not value-neutral; it is itself a social practice involving, for instance, ethical values. Likewise, ethical practices have material sides because they entail specific organisations of concrete interpersonal relationships that are always technologically embodied. (Widdershoven 1988, 105) The meaning of physical properties are essential for people with disabilities. They may be left outside if the physical environment does not enable one to use the technology. Besides high and low technology, the physical environment has scripts. This is connected to the view that disability can be viewed as not a person’s property, but as the property of relationship between a person and his or her environment. In this sense, all the environments that are inaccessible for older people because of physical restrictions can be seen to contain those scripts.
My point here is that the small-level contextual scripts can also form broader societal scripts, by which I mean that technological scripts contribute to defining old age at the society level.
Technology, through its usage, creates societal perceptions of old age, or perceptions of innovations of ageing, which, in their turn affect the formation of policies for innovation and ageing. For example, the discussion about older people as users of technology is one way to construct and reproduce the old age, which is seen for instance in the visions of the information society, where the elderly are considered to be a risk group in danger of being excluded from the information society (see e.g. Sankari 2004). However, there are various kinds of technology in the lives of older people and this technology plays various roles in society and in the every-day lives of older people. The discussion on the acquisition and use of the safety alarm reveal several aspects of old age, which can be handled as “age acts” or
“age speech” producing old age. Age based norms are maintained by ideologies which are resistant to change (Ginn and Arber 1995). Understanding how cultural perceptions of age are produced is important from the point of view of a service system, because public policies are often built on the basis of these (often stereotypical) perceptions (Rintala 1999).
Vakimo (2001) talks about age acts as one of the frequent ways to produce the cultural meanings of the old age. Age acts are every-day actions taken in social interaction, actions producing one’s own or other people’s social age, or actions defining oneself or others within the category of the elderly (Vakimo 2001, 37). Getting biologically old is an automatic and continuing process, but the social and cultural meanings of age are negotiated in every-day interaction situations. Leading one’s every-day life in terms of social actions that one considers to constitute part of an old person’s life can also be considered an age act. (Vakimo 2001, 37-38.) Walkers, walking sticks, etc, are often labelled as age-markers or signs of old age, (Featherstone and Hepworth 1991, see Leinonen and Rantamaa 2001). The use of assistive technology, such as safety alarms, can also be considered as an age act related to later life, while other technology, such as computers, mobile phones and console games are often considered to be part of the younger generation’s everyday life. Active participation in the information society can even be considered an
As noted in Article 3, the discussion about safety alarms is also often connected to the discussion about age (because they are targeted at older people and their relatives), and therefore can be regarded as one element in constructing an age. In the article, the discussion concerned the concept of agency, – the definition of agency is based on Giddens’ (1984) idea of agency as to be able to ’act otherwise’, being able to intervene in the world or to refrain from such intervention. (Giddens 1984, 14). The age acts discussed by safety alarm system users were related either to strong or weak agency. The age acts of strong agency were 1) the role of a safety alarm as activating and empowering, 2) commenting on later life as obedience to the service system (seen as rule-breaking), 3) commenting on later life as dependence (when struggling alone as long as possible without raising an alarm), 4) stressing the old person’s own responsibility for his or her health and life (safety alarm system as an individual choice to avoid the possible risks related to later life). The age acts related to weak agency describe the restricted choice of the users, and these were 5) making the relatives feel safe 6) trust in the experts 7) indifference about the safety alarm as a part of life 8) obedience and not questioning the (sometimes unpractical) rules; 9) stressing the practicality and functionality
As noted in Article 3, the discussion about safety alarms is also often connected to the discussion about age (because they are targeted at older people and their relatives), and therefore can be regarded as one element in constructing an age. In the article, the discussion concerned the concept of agency, – the definition of agency is based on Giddens’ (1984) idea of agency as to be able to ’act otherwise’, being able to intervene in the world or to refrain from such intervention. (Giddens 1984, 14). The age acts discussed by safety alarm system users were related either to strong or weak agency. The age acts of strong agency were 1) the role of a safety alarm as activating and empowering, 2) commenting on later life as obedience to the service system (seen as rule-breaking), 3) commenting on later life as dependence (when struggling alone as long as possible without raising an alarm), 4) stressing the old person’s own responsibility for his or her health and life (safety alarm system as an individual choice to avoid the possible risks related to later life). The age acts related to weak agency describe the restricted choice of the users, and these were 5) making the relatives feel safe 6) trust in the experts 7) indifference about the safety alarm as a part of life 8) obedience and not questioning the (sometimes unpractical) rules; 9) stressing the practicality and functionality