Abstract
PurposeWhen complex social-ecological systems collapse and transform, the possible outcomes of this transformation are not set in stone. This paper aims to explore the role of social imagination in determining possible futures for a reformed system. The authors use a historical study of the Luddite response to the Industrial Revolution centred in the UK in the early-19th century to explore the concepts of path dependency, agency and the distributional impacts of systems change.Design/methodology/approachIn this historical study, the authors used the Luddites’ own words and those of their supporters, captured in archival sources (n = 43 unique Luddite statements), to develop hypotheses around the effects on political, social and judicial consequences of a significant systems transformation. The authors then scaffolded these statements using the heuristics of panarchy and basins of attraction to conceptualize this contentious moment of British history.FindingsRather than a strict cautionary tale, the Luddites’ story illustrates the importance of environmental fit and selection pressures as the skilled workers sought to push the English system to a different basin of attraction. It warns us about the difficulty of a just transition in contentious economic and political conditions.Social implicationsThe Luddites’ story is a cautionary tale for those interested in a just transition, or bottom-up systems transformation generally as the deep basins of attraction that prefer either the status quo or alternate, elite-favouring arrangements can be challenging to shift independent of shocks. While backward looking, the authors intend these discussions to contribute to current debates on the role(s) of social innovation in social and economic policy within increasingly charged or polarized political contexts.Originality/valueSocial innovation itself is often predicated on the need for just transitions of complex adaptive systems (Westley et al., 2013), and the Luddite movement offers us the opportunity to study the distribution effects of a transformative systems change – the Industrial Revolution – and explore two fundamental questions that underpin much social innovation scholarship: how do we build a just future in the face of complexity and what are likely forms those conversations could take, based on historical examples?
Highlights
In contemporary society, Luddites and Luddism are seen as engaged in a Sisyphean task – destroying weaving frames in an otherwise futile tantrum against the future (Sale, 1995; Krugman, 2013)
Modern Luddites rail against automation in the aggregate and individually refuse things like cell phones or high-speed internet in favour of the ways of doing of their childhood. This social memory smooths out the conflict between two different paths or basins of attraction articulated by workers and owners in the first decades of the 19th century
While we have identified the workers’ level of the system as in reorganization, it is clear from the historical record that the Luddites were not in an advantageous position or even equal footing with owners; the resort to “Luddism, though a calculated tactic, issued from the desperation of the knitters” (Roberts, 2017, p. 393)
Summary
Luddites and Luddism are seen as engaged in a Sisyphean task – destroying weaving frames in an otherwise futile tantrum against the future (Sale, 1995; Krugman, 2013). Modern Luddites rail against automation in the aggregate and individually refuse things like cell phones or high-speed internet in favour of the ways of doing of their childhood (or even their parents’ childhood) This social memory smooths out the conflict between two different paths or basins of attraction articulated by workers and owners in the first decades of the 19th century. The secretive workers movement of Luddism acted at a time of significant systems disruption and offered a competing, alternative vision of British society. The transformations they were experiencing undermined a way of life, but their capacity to live and support their families. The Luddites advocated in their interest and proposed fundamentally different systems arrangements than they experienced – their own, Luddite-centric alternative
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
