‘There is a graveyard of failed innovations out there’

Assistant Professor Kornelia Konrad has plans to supervise PhDs and postdocs in the forthcoming ‘Nano Next’ project for the Science Technology and Policy Studies (STePS) research group. She discusses her research interest in the dynamics and assessment of emerging new technologies.

Marloes van Amerom

The transparent, glass meeting rooms of STEP’s in the Ravelijn building serve as a fitting location for the interview, mainly because, remaining ‘open and transparent’ is the usual protocol and recommendation of social scientists operating in Science, Technology and Innovation Studies, to their other scientific colleagues. Innovation in itself may seem a rather straightforward process, dependent on a few good ideas and sufficient funding. But the uptake of innovations into societies and markets also has social dimensions. ‘There is a graveyard of failed innovations out there,’ says Konrad and goes on to explain why her research area in Science, Technology and Innovation Studies is crucially important.
Societal concerns and pressure networks can affect the viability of any given innovation, Konrad says, while ignoring these can also have severe consequences. She mentions asbestos as a primary example, and also refers to biotechnology, a less dramatic illustration of the need to stay open to societal demands. ‘Biotechnology developers were too focused on the biotech hype to notice that people were concerned about it, relying on a ‘once they get the benefits, they will stop opposing’ narrative. Consequently, market opportunities dwindled.’
Perhaps as a result of these lessons, developers of nanotechnology have been more careful.To ensure that innovations can turn into society-friendly applications, it is essential that future applications are not just the outcomes of scientific discoveries and industry desires, but are actively linked to, and prepared for, their social reception.The nanotech industry has actively engaged with public parties to do so, while civil society and other parties have come to play a role in nanotech governance. Whether the identified expectations around nanotechnology, and the thinking through of possible consequences of its use, have actually changed nanotech innovation processes and product design is one thing Konrad hopes to uncover in the forthcoming Nano Next project.
Apart from studying the interface developed technological applications and society, Konrad also analyzed emerging innovation fields. ‘Some innovations, even when based on good ideas, are never developed.While others first hibernate for ages,’ she looks back. Take, for example, electric engines. ‘The combustion engine ended up being the standard equipment for automobiles, but initially it was far from ‘an obvious choice.’ Under pressure from environmentalists, electric engines were rediscovered.’ Hype around new technological discoveries represents their own problems, resulting in pressure for participating parties to ‘jump on the bandwagon’ when alternatives or further adjustments might be better options. Upon its acceptance, the new technology and related appliances may then become ‘blackboxed’ as the obvious best choice, creating path dependencies, until challenged by new discoveries or changing societal demands. She says today's perspective – naïve euphoria over nuclear technology in its early days – is a case in point.
The UT’s emphasis on ‘combining science and social sciences’ comes natural for Konrad, who graduated with a degree in physics, mathematics and sociology at the University of Freiburg. Konrad is also taken by STePS’ informal, dynamic culture. ‘In German universities, only professors are allowed to hold tenured positions, meaning that research activities tend to circulate around a few individuals. Most of the other staff stay for only a short time. Here it is much easier to work in teams, which I like.’
Konrad,a native of Germany,lives across the border in Münster. How does she manage a work-life balance without getting overwhelmed? ‘Sometimes it is hard,’ Konrad concedes. ‘But my partner reduced his workload to help look after our two children, which helps, as does the ability to work 32 hours, some of which are from home.’ She pauses and reflects, ‘It is a good thing institutions support flexible working conditions, yet tragic that some women still feel the need to refrain from having kids to be able pursue careers. Both are important in giving meaning to your life. No one should feel they have to choose.’

Kornelia Konrad poses outside of STePS. (Photo: Gijs van Ouwerkerk)