Theory of the Evolution of Technology - EconPedia

Introduction

Evolution of technology is a stepwise advancement of a complex system of artifact, driven by interactions with sub-systems and other technological systems, considering technical choices, technical requirements and science advances, which generate new and/or improved products or processes for use or consumption to satisfy increasing needs of people and/or to solve complex problems in society.
Technological evolution can be explained in economics and management with two different approaches:
• Traditional theories are based on processes of competitive substitution of a new technology for the old one and a competition between predator and prey technologies in markets.
• New theories based on a multi-mode interaction between technologies (Coccia, 2018, 2019; Pistorius and Utterback, 1997; Utterback et al., 2019).

Traditional theories of technological evolution

 Model of Fisher and Pry
Fisher and Pry (1971, p. 75) argue that technological evolution consists of substituting a new technology for the old one, such as the substitution of coal for wood, hydrocarbons for coal, etc. Fisher and Pry (1971, p. 88) state that: “The speed with which a substitution takes place is not a simple measure of the pace of technical advance . . . . it is, rather a measure of the unbalance in these factors between the competitive elements of the substitution”.

 Predator-Prey approach
Farrell (1993, 1993a) used a model based on Lotka-Volterra equations to examine pure competition between various technologies, such as nylon versus rayon tire cords, telephone versus telegraph usage, etc. In this context, the interaction between technologies can generate a predator-prey relation, where one technology enhances the growth rate of the other but the second inhibits the growth rate of the first (Pistorius and Utterback, 1997, p. 74). In fact, a predator-prey relationship can exist between an emerging technology and a mature technology, where emerging technology enters a niche market that is not served by mature technology. In this case, emerging technology can benefit from the presence of mature technology. At the same time, emerging technology may reduce the market share of mature technology.

New theories of technological evolution

 The moder viewpoint on technological evolution
Utterback et al. (2019) suggest abandoning the idea that technology and innovation originate only in pure competition between new and established artifacts. These scholars argue that the growth of one technology will often stimulate the growth of other technologies, calling this interaction as symbiotic competition (Utterback et al., 2019). In this context, Pistorius and Utterback (1997, p. 72ff) suggest different interactions among technologies in analogy with biology. Sandén and Hillman (2011, p. 407) propose six technological interactions, using a similarity with the interaction of species: i.e., neutralism, commensalism, amensalism, symbiosis, competition and parasitismpredation into one category. Coccia (2018) suggests a matrix to show these different relationships between technologies and their evolutionary pathways (figure 1). Pistorius and Utterback (1997, p. 67) argue that a multi-mode interaction between technologies provides a much richer theoretical framework for technology analysis.

 Theory of Technological Parasitism
Technological parasitism by Coccia (2018, 2019) is a new theory to explain the evolution of technology in society considering the interaction between technologies that generates the coevolution of a host-parasite complex system of artifacts. The crux of the theory of technological parasitism is rooted in the evolutionary ecology of parasites. In fact, parasites (from Greek para = near; sitos = food) are any life form finding their ecological niche in another living system (host). Parasites have a range of traits that evolve to locate in available hosts, survive and disperse among hosts, reproduce and persist.

Coccia (2019, 2018) argues that technologies can have a behavior similar to parasites because technologies cannot survive and develop as independent systems per se, but they can function and evolve in markets if they are associated with other host or master technologies, such as audio headphones, wireless speakers, software apps, etc. that function if and only if they are associated with host or master electronic devices, such as smartphone, radio receiver, television, etc. In particular, a parasitic technology P in a host or master technology H is a technology that during its life cycle is able to interact and adapt into the complex system of H, generating coevolutionary processes to satisfy human needs and desires and/or solve problems in society. Parasitic technologies are often sub-systems embedded within and primarily functional in the ecological system of other host or master technologies. A technology can be a parasite of different host or master technologies, as well as a technology can be a host or master of different parasitic technologies (e.g., mobile devices are host of software applications, headphones, Bluetooth technology,parasitic technologiesetc.; cf., Coccia, 2018). In general, many technologies do not function as independent systems, but de facto they depend, as parasites, on other technologies (hosts or masters) to form a complex system of parts that interact in a non-simple way.
This theory of technological parasitism suggests theoretical and empirical predictions in the evolution of technology (Coccia, 2018, 2019):
1. Technological host or master with many parasitic technologies generates a rapid stepwise evolution of technological host-parasite system. Technological systems with fewer parasitic-virus technologies and a low level of interaction with other technologies improve slowly.
2. Interaction within and between technological host-parasite systems generates coevolution of inter-related systems. May (1981, p. 95) suggests the concept of “orgy of mutual benefaction” that may be also appropriate for explaining the interaction within technological domains. In fact, in this context, the property of mutual benefaction by Coccia (2018) argues that the interaction between technologies reduces negative effects and favors positive effects directed to an evolution of reciprocal adaptations of technologies in complex systems of technology over time and space.

Idea of a Technological Parasitism

The idea of a technological parasitism associated with technological host-parasites coevolution is adequate in some cases but less in others because of the diversity of technologies and their interaction in different complex systems and socioeconomic environments (cf., Coccia, 2018; Pistorius and Utterback, 1997; Sandén and Hillman, 2011). Nevertheless, the analogy here keeps its validity in explaining several phenomena of the coevolution of technology in markets and society.

To conclude, these theories of course cannot predict any given paths and characteristics of the evolution of technologies with precision. We know, de facto, that other things are often not equal in the domain of technology over time and space.