Consequences of Innovations Diffusion of Innovations Everett M. ROGERS Roberta Campos May 2008 Innovation-Development Process Needs / Development Diffusion and Problems Adoption Research (Basic and Commercialization Applied) Consequences Innovation-Development Process Needs / Development Diffusion and Problems Adoption Research (Basic and Commercialization Applied) Consequences Consequences of Innovations Definition: Changes to an individual or a community (social system) as a result of the adoption (or rejection) of an innovation. Consequences: Tomato-harvesting example Before the After the technology (1962): technology (1971) 4,000 farmers 600 farmers 50,000 1,152 machines farmworkers, mostly and 18,000 Mexican men workers (80% immigrants women / a few Soft tomatoes Mexican) (bruises easily in Hard tomatoes (do mechanical not bruise easily) harvesting) – fewer vitamins Weakenesses of data on consequences Rare and « soft » Mainly case studies Difficult to generalize or predict future consequences for current innovations Change agents: pro-innovation bias Bias prevent agents to recognize their responsability on consequences The snowmobile revolution in the artic (p. 406 – 408) Designed for winter recreation in the 50’s Skolt Lapps, of Northern Finland: a reindeer- herding people Innovation adoption investigated through ethnography by an anthropologist: Pertti Pelto. Snowmobile: class of innovation that shifts energy resources from local and autonomous (reinder slads) to external and dependent sources (oil). The snowmobile revolution in the artic (p. 406 – 408) Reindeer role: Meat: main food Reinder sleds: main means of transportation Reinder hides: clothing and shoes Surplus meat: traded for cash (flour, sugar, tea, etc) Reindeers-herding activity: prestige for the herder « First tooth reindeer » and « name-day reindeer »: for kids Wedding gift: small herd of animals The snowmobile revolution in the artic (p. 406 – 408) Lapp society: egalitarian system Each family had an equal number of reindeers. 1961: Ski-Doo displayed on the capital Schoolteacher bought for recreational activities Lapps begin using it for reindeer herding Rapid rate of adoption 1971: almost all households had at least one snowmobile. The snowmobile revolution in the artic (p. 406 – 408) ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES Noise and smell Faster travel: Oil dependent from 3 days to 5 hours Bad performance on rocky land Snowmobile consequences Fewer calves Herd per HH dropped from 52 to 12 in ten years 2/3 HH stopped reindeers raising One family early adopter: become a large herder (1/3 of all the reindeers) Meat was need more than ever to buy snowmobiles, gasoline and spare parts. « Cash dependecy, debts and unemployement » (p. 408) Snowmobile consequences Why Lapps did not resist the innovation? For Pelto, the Lapps were not « technically able to anticipate the far-reaching consequences of the snowmobile » (p. 408) The culture of Skolt Lapps was clearly affected and disrupted. Motocycles Helicopters The study of consequences Na decisão pela adoção estão os elementos do entendimento das consequências Individual characteristics innovativeness consequences and behavior Independent Dependent variable / variable Predictor A model for studying the consequences of innovation (p.410) Antecedents of Indicators of Consequences of innovativeness innovativeness (Independent (prior dependent innovation (New dependent variable) variable) variable) Functional, direct or Socioeconomic manifest consequences characteristics Relative (increased production, higher earliness in income, more leiseure, etc) Personality adopting Dysfunctional, indirect new ideas Communication or latent consequences (Greater expense, need for more behavior capital, social inequality) Why consequences are less studied? Change agents: pro-innovation assumptions (needs fullfilled) Usual survey methods are less suitable for consequence assessments Consequences unfold over an extended period of time Consequences are difficult to measure: individuals are not always fully aware of consequences (individual and system consequences) Cultural relativism: researcher needs an inside view of the culture to generate judgement and measure (Ex: Pierre Clastres) Difficult to isolate result of innovation from other effects and context Original introduction objectives may be concealed by subsequent rationalization by system members. Consequences taxonomy Desirable X Undesirable Direct X Indirect Anticipated X Unanticipated Consequences taxonomy Desirable X Undesirable: effect on adopters Example of undesirable consequences: social system qualities that guarantee the welfare of the system => reindeers-hendering Family bonds, Respect for life and property, Respect for ancestors Consequences can be desired for the system and undesired for certain individuals: tomato harvester Windfall profits: positive consequences for early adopters (higher risks) Consequences taxonomy Desirable X Undesirable: effect on adopters Generalization 1: « The effects of an innovation usually cannot be managed to separate the desirable from the undesirable consequences » (p. 414) Principle of inseparability: Amish Consequences taxonomy Direct X Indirect One change generates a chain reaction Direct consequences: come from innovation Indirect come from consequences Example: wet rice growing in Madagascar Innovation Direct Indirect Indirect Indirect Effects effects (1st effects (2nd effects (3rd generation) generation) generation) Wet rice Permanent Individual Social status Changes in cultivation settlements land differences tribal ownership govern. Change in Breakdown Bonds Slavery and labor in kinship formed on competition techniques clans economic for land basis only Nonsharing Role of the of food father is changed Consequences taxonomy Anticipated X Unantecipated Anticipated: innovation changes recognized and intended by the members Snowmobile’s rapid transportation Unanticipated: unknown or unintended changes Breast liquid silicone implants « A system is like a bowl of marbles: move any one of its elements and the positions of all the others are inevitably changed also » (p. 419) Consequences taxonomy Generalization 2: « The undesirable, indirect and unanticipated consequences of an innovationusually go together, as do the desirable, direct and anticipated consequences» (p. 421) Steel axes for Stone-Age Aborigines Stone ax: central tool in their culture Symbol of masculinity and respect for elders Axes borrowed from fathers, uncles, older men in the family. Missionairs distributed steel axes as gifts or payments Expected consequences: improvement of living conditions Unexpected consequences: disruption of status relations and a confusion of ages and sex roles. Prostitution in exchange on steel axes Consequences characteristics Form: directly observable substance of innovation Function: contribution generated to the way of life of adopters Meaning: subjective perception of an innovation by individuals (Cultural dimension) Consequences characteristics Generalization 3: « Change agents more easily anticipate the form and function of an innovation for their clients than its meaning » (p. 423) Ideal rate of change? Stable equilibrium: when there is almost no change Dynamic equilibrium: rate of change is commensurate with the system’s ability to deal with it Disequilibrium: too rapid change of rate for the system to adjust To whom introduce innovations? Innovators and early adopters: open and ressourceful to adopt innovations Opinion leaders among innovators: trickle across rather than trickle-down Individual with different social status in the society The communication effect gap Has the communication had a different effect on certain individuals than others? Measure: Average amount of behavior change in the audience Gap increase or decrease in socioeconomic status and knowledge Objective: to look within an audience to determine whether certain segments were more affected than others The communication effect gap Generalization 4: « The consequences of the diffusion of innovation usually widen the socioeconomic gap between the earlier and later adopting categories in a system » (p. 433) Generalization 5: « The consequences of the diffusion usually widen the socioeconomic gap between the audience segments previously high and low in social status » (p. 433) Social structure and equality How an innovation is introduced determines in part the degree to which it causes unequal consequences. Bangladesh: irrigation purchase by large farmers Pakistan: irrigation purchase by village cooperatives Adoption determined by system structure (S curve socially determined) Social structure and equality Generalization 6: « A system’s social structure partly determines the equality versus inequality of an innovation’s consequences» (p. 436) Narrowing gaps The ups have greater access to information: provide messages that are less interesting to higher economic audience Message segmentation Shift agents action from early adopters to late majority Identify opinion leaders among the disadvantaged segments Select agents from the downs for a homophilous exchange Narrowing gaps The ups possess greater resources: Develop apropriate innovation for the downs Create a social organization to cope with the absence of individual resources Establish special diffusion agencies to work only with downs Depend more on indigenous knowledge system Narrowing gaps Generalization 7: « When special efforts are made by a diffusion agency, it is possible to narrow, or at least to maintain the size of socioeconomic gaps in a social system» (p. 439) Thank you!