Innovation’s social externalities, or Playing Playstation alone…
Danah Boyd, a researcher of emerging social networks, and teens’ behavior, wrote about the “social externalities” of innovation. The concept of externalities, negative or positive, is becoming accepted partly due to the environmental movement. The idea is that whenever a voluntary trade occurs, it is supposed to benefit both parts - I have a chair, but I’d rather have 150$, you have 150$, but you’d rather have a chair. After we trade, we are both better off. If the person buying the chair was affected by the transaction (for example through noise pollution from all the hammering at my chair factory), that price would be reduced to take this into account, however if there is a positive or negative effect for a third person, external to the trade, that would not be calculated into the price. Thus the chair would be priced too highly, and would be over-produced, compared to what would be socially ideal.
The classic examples of this is pollution as a negative externality (if pollution was taken into account, products would be much higher, and the equilibrium output would be lower), or education (there is a positive benefit to society to having educated individuals, and if the full cost is left to the individual, they will under-consume education. Thus, society subsidizes education). There are different ways of dealing with externalities, one is for the state to tax, often called a sin tax. Thus, there could be a carbon dioxide tax which tried to internalize at least a part of the negative externality. Some freemarketeers advocate private ownership of natural resources, including the air, instead.
The father of peace research, Johan Galtung, once wrote about the social externalities of international trade (I cannot find where he wrote it, but I am quite sure that it was him). He posited that when Western countries are trading with developing countries, we often structure the trade so that we get to do advanced work that gives us experience and insight, whereas workers in developing countries are doing manual and repetitive work that does not enable them to progress. This should then be seen as a negative externality for the developing country involved in the trade, and compensated. (An example is all the Western consultants who work on development in the developing world, who develop skills that are then useful to their countries of origin, whereas the local people are just physically handing out food, or building bridges).
In her latest piece, Danah talks about the social externalities of technology, mentioning the example of air-conditioning in the Southern US. Before its advent, people would gather in cool places, on porches or in cinemas, but with air conditioning, they could stay at home. This dovetails with something I have often thought about - whether all new technology makes us less dependent on each other, and more “disconnected”. I know that we can now connect with and learn from people all around the world, but we choose exactly who those people are. I believe “having” to interact with different people in our local community is a positive thing for society. I think countries where even wealthy people and politicians take the subway, are more healthy democracies than ones in which they isolate themselves.
Most of us, the middle classes, used to take collective transit, go to the cinema, use a public phone… This meant that we had an investment in the public sphere. Now, we can drive our cars, talk on the cell phone, watch a movie on our home cinema. (The fact that Toronto had something like four cinemas showing Chinese movies, and now has none, because of the advent of DVDs, makes me incredibly sad. I can only hope that the advent of digital distribution changes this again). When I was living in a apartment building in Norway, I used to think that instead of every apartment having a TV, why not have a cinema in the basement, that people could book? I don’t want to watch TV every night, but I’d love to be able to go to the cinema to see a good movie three-four times a week…
I am also impressed at the numbers of thoughtful commenters on Danah’s post. Nicole, for example, writes:
Your post has me thinking about the social externality of closed captioning technology on the Deaf community. While the community doesn’t articulate it as such they are familiar with the concept. Many old skool Deaf folks attribute the rise of closed captioning on broadcast TV and watch-at-home movies with the decline in Deaf Clubs and community social spaces. Deaf people are staying home to watch captioned entertainment instead of sign language performances or socializing at the local Deaf club. It’s a catch 22– while the community actively supports and advocates for more captioned media (especially on the internet) they wax nostalgic about the good old days when Deaf people had physical spaces of their own where they could gather as a community.
Of course, it is possible that this isn’t technology’s fault, as much as our societies. I remember hearing, when I was studying Chinese, how in Chinese cities many people didn’t have TVs, and the people who did would put them out on the streets, and neighbors would gather around to watch - turning what in North America is a lonely past time (well, not always - one invites friends over to watch soccer) into a social one. I didn’t see that, but in many cafes, people would gather to watch movies and sports at night, both in China and in Egypt. Similarly, in India many villages are serviced by a cell-phone lady, turning the ultimate individual tool, into a common good. One could argue though, that most of those villagers would have liked the convenience of having their own phone, if they could afford it.
So are we moving inexorably towards a society where we’ll only ever have to interact with people we want to interact with? And what will be the social and political consequences of such a society?
Another good post by Danah: US teens dividing by class on Facebook and Myspace.
Stian
(thanks to ernoldiño @ flickr for the cellphone picture and hive @ flickr for the outdoor cinema picture)
