Innovation Studies

Exploring Economic, Social and Cultural Impacts of Innovation Ecosystems, Districts, Precincts and Hubs.

Rhetoric and Reality in Technology Visions critically examines the interaction between the soaring rhetoric of technology visions and the tangible realities manifesting in innovation ecosystems, including specialised districts, precincts, and hubs. Grounded in a multidisciplinary framework that melds political economy, innovation studies, and critical theory, the study explores the complex layers that constitute these ecosystems.

​

The research adopts a global perspective, starting with governance models, contrasting established ecosystems like Silicon Valley with emerging innovation centres in Bangalore and Medicon Valley. These case examples illustrate the varying roles of power elites, policy instruments, and institutional architectures in shaping the development trajectory of innovation ecosystems. The research reveals that governance models often reflect entrenched power dynamics that may, inadvertently or deliberately, marginalise other stakeholders, such as local communities, thereby affecting the equitable distribution of benefits.

 

While acknowledging their undeniable role in job creation, technological advancements, and generating economic prosperity, the analysis shows how these ecosystems can simultaneously exacerbate economic inequalities, contribute to gentrification, and even lead to environmental degradation. This dichotomy suggests the urgent need for governance models that consider social and environmental justice.

 

Much of the study examines the "Rhetorical Technology Vision"—the compelling narratives often accompanying technological advancements. It scrutinises how these visions, propagated by corporations, policymakers, and the media, can galvanise investment, shape public policy, and even influence collective imagination, for better or worse. The study cautions against the uncritical acceptance of these narratives, as they can mislead public opinion and result in misaligned investments, straying far from sustainable development and social equity objectives.

 

Calling attention to the divergences between the idealised visions and on-ground realities, the study advocates for a more democratic, inclusive approach to innovation governance. It recommends policy reforms to foster stakeholder inclusivity, transparency, and comprehensive impact assessments considering environmental and social metrics alongside economic gains.

​

​

​

Governance structures in innovation districts, precincts, and hubs are a cornerstone for how these areas function, evolve and interact with their broader ecosystems. Importantly, they serve as the locus where many themes—such as rhetorical technology visions, power dynamics, and social justice and equity concerns—play out most tangibly.

The notion of governance is central to understanding how innovation ecosystems function.

 

Governance models range from hierarchical or 'top-down' to decentralised and network-based. Among them, associative governance stands out for its collaborative orientation, drawing on the strengths of various actors—government, industry, and academia—to create synergistic relationships.

 

This project explores associative governance in action through various case studies, exploring its real-world applications and outcomes.

​

The intersection of global trends and local identities adds another complex layer. Innovation districts often aspire to be globally competitive, attracting international talent and investment. This leads to universalising certain norms and practices, potentially at the cost of local culture and social fabric.

 

Balancing global aspirations with local integrity is a governance challenge with no easy solutions, but it remains central to the long-term success and acceptance of these innovation ecosystems 

​