Abstract
Abstract
In this paper we investigate how different discourses on frugal innovation are articulated, and how the dynamics between these different discourses have led to a certain dominant understanding of frugal innovation today. We analyse the dynamic interactions between three discourses on frugal innovation: (1) innovations for the poor, (2) grassroots innovations by the poor, and more recently (3) co-creating frugal innovations with the poor. We argue that this latter discourse is articulated as a hegemonic project as it is designed to accommodate demands from both business and poor communities. We draw on Laclau and Mouffe’s concepts of ‘chain of difference’, ‘empty signifier’ and ‘floating signifier’ to explain the advent of the hegemonic discourse on co-creating innovations with the poor. We show how a floating signifier with radical potential, frugal innovation, has been hijacked and co-opted in a hegemonic project that has leveraged powerful ambiguous signifiers, with co-creation acting as an empty signifier. To clarify what is problematic in this hegemonic intervention, we expose how contemporary frugal innovation discourse contributes to a project of governing and exploiting rather than helping the poor, in ways that benefit formal economic actors while further worsening global inequalities.
Funder
Hanken School of Economics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Law,Economics and Econometrics,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),General Business, Management and Accounting,Business and International Management
Reference130 articles.
1. Akubue, A. (2000). Appropriate technology for socioeconomic development in third world countries. The Journal of Technology Studies. https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v26i1.a.6
2. Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2020). The problematizing review: A counterpoint to Elsbach and Van Knippenberg’s argument for integrative reviews. Journal of Management Studies, 57, 1290–1304.
3. Arora, S., & Romijn, H. (2009). Innovation for the base of the pyramid: Critical perspectives from development studies on heterogeneity and Participation. UNU-MERIT working papers.
4. Arora, S., & Romijn, H. (2012). The empty rhetoric of poverty reduction at the base of the pyramid. Organization, 19(4), 481–505.
5. Banerjee, S. B. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and the ugly. Edward Elgar.
Cited by
15 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献